Chastity Jones Case

Testimony this Thursday morning began with a New York State Police Investigator who is part of the computer crimes unit. She said her analysis of Michael Beard's phone is that there was quiet a bit of deleting and a lot of powering off, including more than 100 deleted calls.

On June 20, 2001 by far one of the most horrific things happened. Five children was drowned in the tub and killed by their mother Andrea Yates (Noah, aged 7; John, aged 5; Paul, aged 3; Luke, aged 2; and Mary, 6 months).

In order to create a grooming policy that is effective it is important to understand the law, multiple religions, and culture details to avoid discriminatory policies that lead to lawsuits. Grooming policies should focus on what attire is safe for the work environment and maintains gender neutrality (Williams, 2015). For example police officers are usually required to keep their hair short. Allowing the women to pull their hair back in a bun is a good alternative. Grooming policies should not have a negative effect on the ability of a person to have religious expression or practice (Williams, 2015). For example if a religion requires a person to be completely covered but they work around machines that could jeopardize safety an alternative

The nature of this case concerns Christopher Alston, who was practicing Rastafarian (Lally, 2015). Rastafarian is a religion that began in Jamaica in the 1920s and 30s, believing that Haile Selassie was an emperor, a direct descendant of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, whose death was a hoax and is still alive, living in protection awaiting the Day of Judgment (Rastafarianism). The Rastafarian’s hair is worn in dreadlocks, which is inspired by the Nazarites of the Bible and are symbolic to the Lion of Judah (Rastafarianism). Christopher applied for a job as a delivery driver for Mims Distributing Company in May 2014 (Lally, 2015). As a Rastafarian, Christopher was restricted from cutting his hair and hadn’t cut his hair since 2009 (Lally, 2015). Christopher was informed by Mims Distributing Company that he would have to cut his hair if he wanted the position (Lally, 2015). Because of his religious belief, he refused to cut his hair and the company was unable to hire him due to noncompliance

Workplace discrimination takes place when an employee is hostilely discriminated against for one or more reasons, including gender, religion, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity or race. Per the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, racial discrimination comprises of treating a job candidate or employee negatively because they are of a certain ethnicity or because of particular features linked with their race, such as hair texture, facial features or skin color. While the law forbids workplace harassment and discrimination in all facets of employment, from hiring and training to raises and layoffs, the EEOC still reports thousands of claims a year. One such claim was filed by the EEOC in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota against Alliant Techsystems (ATK), on behalf of Tyeastia Green.

In the society we all live in today, where outside beauty is emphasized more than inner beauty, businesses have realized how to utilize that view to their own benefit They have looked at trends and realized that it is profitable to hire those with outer beauty. However, since certain businesses are only hiring certain ethnicities in order to project that image, it has been questioned whether these businesses are discriminating. In the article, Going for the Look, but Risking Discrimination, it says that " hiring attractive people is not necessarily illegal, but discriminating on the basis of age, sex, and ethnicity is." The companies cannot help it that only certain types of people fit their marketing image and their hiring strategies are

Companies that discriminate on basis of a host of job-irrelevant issues, comprising race, sexual orientation, gender, disability, age and ethnicity put themselves at a competitive disadvantage as opposed to companies that appraise employees solely on their credentials and qualifications to work well. Given the high rates of discrimination encountering the workforce today, discrimination based on racial discrimination and sexual orientation represents an actual hazard to the profitability of companies (Oeo.tufts.edu, 2015). This essay discusses the non-discrimination policy of the Home depot company.

As an African American hair plays a vital role in our society. The ideal of Black hair is one that allows you to explore your inner feelings, attitudes and sense of style through the facet of hair. However, this freedom of expression becomes questioned as you try to pursue a professional career. As an African American woman pursuing a career in the field of broadcast journalism, your freedom of expression through hair is often limited by corporate policy. By pursuing a career in this field and attaining my first internship in a top 10 market. I have already faced some challenges. Due to the fact that I was only an intern, I did not receive pressure from corporate level to change my look. However, I placed internal pressure on myself to assimilate to white culture standard of “professionalism” by straightening my hair for an intern newscast. I decided to elongate my naturally, kinky curly hair in order to fit the bill of a typical news anchor. Who declared black hair of any style to be unprofessional?

The facts of this issues is that there has been in some cases of hairstyle based discrimination within the work place. Looking at the case of EEOC v. Mims Distributing Company, Inc., in regards to Christopher Alston, an African American man. This case was a hairstyle based discrimination, however it was based on the company not having a policy to addressed hairstyle as a religious practice. The outcome of this case ended with Mims Distributing Company paying $50,000 and adopting a formal religious accommodation policy that will address future issues (Lally, 2015). Another case based on hairstyle discrimination would be Farryn Johnson v. Hooters. Ms. Johnson, an African American was awarded more than $250,000 after an arbitrator found that racial discrimination did in fact contributed to her getting fired (CHUCK, 2015). Hooters prohibits only African-American Hooters Girls from wearing blond highlights in their hair, other women were allowed to wear blond highlight in their hair (CHUCK, 2015). Johnson was told by the manager that blond streaks didn 't look natural on African Americans (CHUCK, 2015). However, on the other hand cases that are similar to Chasity Jones, an African American woman, who was initially hired to work for Catastrophe Management Systems but notified later that the job was withdrawn because of her hairstyle, which were dreadlocks, was not found guilty of discrimination (Wellington, 2016). However, every case is not like the other case because

While it does not seem right, employers do care about our appearance. Jobs exist to make money and right now there is a tough job market. With a lot of people out there looking for jobs, employers can afford to be picky. This is not about human rights and freedom, but about free enterprise.

Title VII states that an employee cannot be treated differently because of sex unless sex is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ). When used as a defense, bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) allows an organization to hire and employ individuals on the basis of the qualifications reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise. This paper will discuss the necessary steps employers must take in order to justify using sex as a discriminator when hiring employees and review some known cases where BFOQ was used as a defense.

Based on similar issues in the past many have sued their employers for discrimination and won due to their beliefs. For example, Sikh men have beards and many employers have discriminated against them for something they believed in. For Christopher Polk he grew dreads because he wanted to practice Rastafarian beliefs which falls under the same category as the Sikh men who wore beards. Mr. Polk should most definitely be able to have dreads even though there is a grooming policy in place with his employer. FedEx policy stated “reasonable styles” which indicated that different styles other than long straight hair or ponytails are the only “reasonable styles” are acceptable. Given that Mr. Polk was hired then fired by the same company should tell

Yes, I do believe that others should be able to violate grooming policy based on religion beliefs. Reason being an organization or business should be able accommodate any employee needs when it comes down to respecting any religion preference. But when reading the article regarding Mr. Polk dreadlocks, it sounds like this is something that he decided to do while working for FedEx. It doesn’t sound like he was a Rastafarian before working for FedEx. However Mr. Polk knew before becoming Rastafarian that there were guidelines regarding grooming. Before, Mr. Polk decided to make a decision to grow out his dreadlocks it was his responsibility as a staff member to change his religion preference and discuss his change of hair. We as employees staff

“ I believe discrimination still exists in society and we must fight it in every form,” stated Andrew Cuomo. The following quote relates to the topic of appearance discrimination. Discrimination is a main issue in the world today. There are laws now that protect people against discrimination towards religion, gender, race, etc. Although there are laws to protect people, there is still discrimination going on against appearance. This type of discrimination occurs a great deal in the workplace. Employers are making policies on how they want their employees to look. This causes issues that end up being described as appearance discrimination. Appearance based discrimination in the workplace is wrong because it can cause severe health issues, can ruin employment chances for people, and cause unequal salaries and promotions, even in jobs that do not even have requirements about appearance.

Wolf discusses the effect that these standards are having on women in the workplace. A woman’s beauty, or lack of it, can be used against her. In 1986, Mechelle Vinson lost a sexual harassment case. “Vinson was young and ‘beautiful’ and carefully dressed. The district court ruled that her appearance counted against her.” (Wolf 38) “In Hopkins v. Price-Waterhouse, Ms. Hopkins was denied a partnership because she needed to learn to ‘walk more femininely, talk more femininely, dress more femininely,’ and ‘wear makeup’.” She brought in more business than any other employee. (Wolf 39)