The reasonability for a difference in groooming standards between yourself in a senior role in HR and a delivery driver is in my opinion, more than justifiable. I mean no offense to delivery drivers, but I think it would be hard to argue that the accountability and position levels are equal.
>The reasonability for a difference in groooming standards between >yourself in a senior role in HR and a delivery driver is in my >opinion, more than justifiable. I mean no offense to delivery >drivers, but I think it would be hard to argue that the accountability >and position levels are equal.
Hmmmm...for some reason I feel the image of the company to our customers is a lot more important than the image I project in HR. Don't you?
Jabarian, you've consistently had responses indicating that you need to come to an accommodation within yourself to accept your employer's grooming standard. Your original post asked for suggestions on what you could do given your feelings about wearing long hear and your employer's policy prohibiting it.
Yet, for each response that indicated you needed to come to that resolution, you took issue, contending that your employer should change its policy. Your original post even went so far as to indicate that in order to keep your long hair, you were going to change your religious beliefs.
Your asking for suggestions seems to have been a "rouse" to get into an argument to help you justify to yourself why you wanted to keep long hair, jeopardizing your employment. That's your decision. But it seems to me you've got to make some fundamental decisions and look at your priorities.
If your were seeking to resolve a conflict between reporting a friend at work for wrongdoing or not doing anything, for example, I could see the ethical dilemma you'd be faced with. I could see why you would argue your initial position to anyone who gave an opposing view to help you assure yourself of that position or come to the conclusion that your position wasn't the best one for you.
In this case, though, all you are dealing with is a superficial matter, length of hair, versus major components of your life -- your job, your economic status, your career. Your hardened position would be commendable if, as I said, you were faced with real ethical choices. But you're not. You need to look at your priorities, otherwise you may find more problems down the road on other issues.
You basically have three choices, at this point, it seems to me --
1. Cut your hair, stay with your job, and develop your authority in the company where you do have some control over a hair policy. Then get it changed to what you want.
2. Quit your job, keeping your long hair and find another job where long hair is acceptable. Or, keep your long hair on your current job, and see what happens, with the expectation that you will probably get fired.
2a. If you do get fired then find a very good labor lawyer who will take your case and try to win in court on a claim of wrongful termination.
3. Make a "half way" accommodation. Cut your hair but get a wig and stay with your job. Wear the wig off work hours. Or consult a hair stylist to see if it is possible to wear the long hair bunched up under a "short hair wig" and wear the short-hair wig to work.
In any case, I don't see where any more discussion here is going to help you on this matter since you are hardened on your position that you want long hair and you think your employer is absolutely wrong to have the policy that it does.
>Jabarian, you've consistently had responses indicating that you need >to come to an accommodation within yourself to accept your employer's >grooming standard. Your original post asked for suggestions on what >you could do given your feelings about wearing long hear and your >employer's policy prohibiting it. >
The policy isn't a written one, therefore I feel I can challege it sufficiently and win. If they aren't going to standardize their expectations, then they really can't "punish" someone for not following expectations they never made clear in the first place, can they?
No one told me I couldn't have long hair and I never signed anything that said "I understand it's againt company policy to have long hair on men.."
>In this case, though, all you are dealing with is a superficial >matter, length of hair, versus major components of your life -- your
To you the matter is superficial. I don't expect you to understand why it's important to me. But know that my second career is music and tradionally men have long hair.
>job, your economic status, your career. Your hardened position would >be commendable if, as I said, you were faced with real ethical >choices. But you're not. You need to look at your priorities, >otherwise you may find more problems down the road on other issues. >
It is down to ethics. I am a very "fair" person. Sometimes painfully so. If it's not fair to the group then it shouldn't be allowed. Women are allowed long hair or short hair. They are allowed to wear comfortable clothes. Men here are expected to wear TIES and have SHORT hair. I contend this isn't FAIR. It's SEXIST!!
>You basically have three choices, at this point, it seems to me -- > >1. Cut your hair, stay with your job, and develop your authority in >the company where you do have some control over a hair policy. Then >get it changed to what you want. >
Not going to happen. I have my principals and I am sticking to them. If they fire me for not cutting my hair, they'll have to produce documentation showing I was made aware of that before I was hired. They can't. They also can not use "assumed" rules regarding the length of my hair. That also will not hold up in court. Add in the fact that as an employee, I am consistently rated excellent in my performance....well...they'd have a hard time convincing a judge that they didn't fire me for my length of hair....and therefore wrongfully terminated me.
If they want to make me rich, they are welcomed to fire me over a company policy not written anywhere and one I didn't sign.
>2. Quit your job, keeping your long hair and find another job where >long hair is acceptable. Or, keep your long hair on your current job, >and see what happens, with the expectation that you will probably get >fired. >
Well, we already know that I am not going to cut my hair. I am working on changing my career (network administrator) but need more time to be fully prepared. That's a career where hair length is less important.
And honestly I doubt they would fire me here. What they would do is demote me (since they tend to do that here) and should they do that, I would have a meeting with the labor board
> 2a. If you do get fired then find a very good labor lawyer who will >take your case and try to win in court on a claim of wrongful >termination. >
I am confident I would win....easily.
>3. Make a "half way" accommodation. Cut your hair but get a wig and >stay with your job. Wear the wig off work hours. Or consult a hair >stylist to see if it is possible to wear the long hair bunched up >under a "short hair wig" and wear the short-hair wig to work. >
Actually this is about the only acceptable compromise I would accept. I am going to look for one this weekend in Vegas. I wouldn't tell work about it, I would just start wearing the wig.
Stupid that I have to do this, but then again most companies are still stuck to the irrational thought process that length of hair is equally proportationate to the professionalism of the company....
>In any case, I don't see where any more discussion here is going to >help you on this matter since you are hardened on your position that >you want long hair and you think your employer is absolutely wrong to >have the policy that it does.
Actually it helps me a lot. There are a lot of really nice people who've offered advice. Yourself included. If I seem a bit hardened, it's because I've reached the point where I am sick of hearing how long hair on men is unprofessional, as if it somehow automatically makes me less intelligent *rolleyes*.
I'm sick of stereotypes. I'm sick of people at work claiming to have no predijudces and then staring me in the face saying "long hair on men is unacceptable".
I appreciate your help, really. This is a frustration that's long overdue. I am not mad at anyone here and it's really good to read the responses. At least I know what I am up against and your suggestions may indeed help me come to a quick and easy solution.
My boss has real long hair ( below the shoulder ) , plus a mustache - and he just turned 70 ! He is considered one of the top professionals in his field , both nationally and internationally. It is his skills that reasonable people really notice, not his hair length.
For me the issue at stake here is not whether I personally have a problem with long hair. The issue I believe is whether Jabarian's employer can set a dress code standard in which long hair on men (absent a bond fide religious or faith-based belief) is not allowed. I personally don't care one way or another if Jabarian has long hair. But his employer does reserve rights to regulate its own workplace. And if he does not have a bona fide protected cause for growing his hair long versus just because he likes it, then his employer can respond as such.
>For me the issue at stake here is not whether I personally have a >problem with long hair. The issue I believe is whether Jabarian's >employer can set a dress code standard in which long hair on men >(absent a bond fide religious or faith-based belief) is not allowed. >I personally don't care one way or another if Jabarian has long hair. >But his employer does reserve rights to regulate its own workplace. >And if he does not have a bona fide protected cause for growing his >hair long versus just because he likes it, then his employer can >respond as such.
My employer does not have a written, standardized dress code. I signed no polocies and procedures manual. If long hair is not allowed, then they should make that clear in writing. I have a hard time accepting they can fire me for having long hair when it wasn't made clear it was no allowed WHEN I STARTED this job.
>My boss has real long hair ( below the shoulder ) , plus a mustache - >and he just turned 70 ! He is considered one of the top professionals >in his field , both nationally and internationally. It is his skills >that reasonable people really notice, not his hair length.
As with me Once people see what I accomplish, my hair becomes an non-issues (and it should never be in the first place).
> >Have you even discussed this with your manager or Department/Division >head? >
Briefly with my Manager to which she said that long hair would never be acceptable in HR.
>Perhaps I'm assuming, but I get the impression there's been little or >no dialogue between you and you're managers. >
Little because the hair isn't an issue yet, but it's getting long and soon I'll not be able to hide it anymore. Then I need to make a decision.
>Have you been informed that you will be terminated if you don't cut >your hair?
No.
>Have you even been "advised" that you should cut your hair? >
Not yet, but then again I've hidden it very well. If I don't do what I normally do to hide it, it's pretty long.
>From reading your messages, you appear to have other problems with >your position and the company you work for.
Not really. This is a great place to work. Intellectually it's not very challenging right now as we're in a downsizing mode so there isn't a lot of hiring going on (hence the extra free time to do research). When it get's busy though, it's very fun and challenging work....hair or no hair.
Well, I guess I have to participate. In my opinion, whether or not long hair is appropriate in HR is a matter of organization culture and if long hair if OK, its OK and if not, it's not. I work in academia, and in California, and one might think that our our culture would be accepting. It wouldn't. We are a medical institution and I would'nt want to put up with a bunch of profs, who teach a bunch of short haired students every day, make remarks about the long haired guy in HR. It just doesn't fit.
Regarding converting to a religion and getting accomodation. Jabarian, the dialogue on this web site would be used to make the case that, just perhaps, the requested religious accomodation is not bona fide. I will worry about long hair in our HR department just as soon as a long haired person shows up who has a bona fide religious need. Now I'm through.
I, along with Gillian, am a CA employer. There may be a perception that being in CA, staff can come come to work any way in which they please. My history has been with upscale hospitality, and dress code standards are the norm. I have even worked at a Casino, where I developed a pretty rigid grooming and appearance standard policy. Employees were notified of the standards during orientation and absent proof of medical certification or bona fide religious accomodation, there were few exceptions made. Again, even if a compamy does not have a written policy, the employer still has the right to set policy as it deems suitable to its business...
Personally, I would wear long hair if I could. But I can't.
I could understand your arguement better if you were an hourly employee, but I assume by your position you are exempt. Obviously you and your company are not a good fit. For exempt employees, you do not need a policy violation, or whatever, to terminate someone. Exempt employees are terminated all the time because they are just not compatible with the company. You could argue the Title VII stuff-- but I don't think you would win.
You use the arguement that other less professional looking people see customers 10X more than you do. You are Human Resources-- you have internal customers. If your employer wants you to be as presentable to your internal customers as they do your external customers, I think that is great. It shows the employees that management cares.
Again, I feel there is nothing wrong with long hair on men. But I also feel that a company should have some reasonable expectation that they can dictate some aspects of appearance. I don't see any difference in the nose ring with a chain and the long hair. Either one hardly ever affects job performance but nobody seems to take issue with employer's nixing the nose rings with chains. A poor analogy but...would you conduct business with Hooter's if all their employees could have any appearance they chose as long as it did not affect the performance of their ability to service orders? It is not just the clothes issue-- what if they all wanted to shave their heads (opposite of you)? Would they lose business? Yes. Should the Hooters company have a right (besides religious accomodation) to dictate some appearance issues of their employees if they are afraid they will lose business?
I'm thankful to have a job. I won't do anything unethical, illegal, or against my CURRENT religion for them. But if they say to wear my hair short, I'll take that house payment and car payment money from them and cut my hair.
>I'm thankful to have a job. I won't do anything unethical, illegal, or >against my CURRENT religion for them. But if they say to wear my hair >short, I'll take that house payment and car payment money from them >and cut my hair.
This statement shows how far apart we think.
I'd rather take a less paying job to keep my hair. I work to live, not live to work. Work is career, but not my life. I work to pay the bills but my second career as a musician is my life...and my hair with it. If I can't work this career and pay the bills, I guess I need to switch careers...
I personally believe that as long as you DRESS professionally and tie your hair back, it should be acceptable.
>I, along with Gillian, am a CA employer. There may be a perception >that being in CA, staff can come come to work any way in which they >please. My history has been with upscale hospitality, and dress code >standards are the norm. I have even worked at a Casino, where I >developed a pretty rigid grooming and appearance standard policy. >Employees were notified of the standards during orientation and absent >proof of medical certification or bona fide religious accomodation, >there were few exceptions made. Again, even if a compamy does not >have a written policy, the employer still has the right to set policy >as it deems suitable to its business... >
If the policy was not made clear before I accepted the job, it is THEN ok for them to fire me based only on the length of my hair? It seems to me I have a case against that....
>Stop! Stop! Stop! > >Please, we have covered every aspect of this issue we possibly >could... and then some! Can we move on to another issue? > >Margaret Morford >theHRedge >615-371-8200 >mmorford@mleesmith.com >[url]http://www.thehredge.net[/url]
Well isn't that what a discussion forum is for? I acutally let the thread die for a few days and all the sudden there were 7 replies. I just responded to them. I don't think anyone is at each other's throats and so far, I see a healthy debate.
If you think this is bad, you should see some of the football forums!
I've said it before and I'll say it again. As MY final contribution to this thread.
Jabarian, there is no healthy debate. You have taken a position, which is your "human right" to do. You have rejected every rationale proffered to you on why your position in the work environment isn't on firm ground. You have been intransigent, which again is your human right. But then be aware if your employer doesn't back down, that in order to prove yourself "legally right" if you can, you'll need to go into court. And there, with "at-will status" employment, and hair not falling under a "civil rights" law, most likely, you will not prevail.
There has been no real healthy debate: Two separate positions - Yours and just about everyone else's.
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 01-14-02 AT 12:48PM (CST)[/font][p] >I've said it before and I'll say it again. As MY final contribution to >this thread. > >Jabarian, there is no healthy debate. You have taken a position, >which is your "human right" to do. You have rejected every rationale >proffered to you on why your position in the work environment isn't on >firm ground. You have been intransigent, which again is your human >right. But then be aware if your employer doesn't back down, that in >order to prove yourself "legally right" if you can, you'll need to go >into court. And there, with "at-will status" employment, and hair not >falling under a "civil rights" law, most likely, you will not prevail. >
I'll prevail based on what I've said here time and time again. There is NOTHING WRITTEN that says I have to maintain short hair. NOTHING. Our drivers have long hair. Our drivers are OUR employees. If my company decides they want to fire me based on hair length ... a predicent they never set before, I am willing to take YOUR MONEY that not only would I win in court, I would win in a landslide.
Healthy debate? YOU BET!
>There has been no real healthy debate: Two separate positions - Yours >and just about everyone else's.
You've not read the entire thread, I see. I've accepted varying opinions and some people AGREE with me. I'm not going to lay down just because YOU disagree with me. Please. A healthy debate has both sides discussing the issues. Just because it doesn't follow YOUR idea of a health debate doesn't mean it isn't. If you don't like what I have to say, you are free to skip the thread. You aren't obligated to reply, that's for sure.
What you are missing is that there does not have to be anything written on short hair. There is nothing written in our handbook that says you can not have a tatoo on your neck. We have employees that have tatoos on their necks. We do not have any exempt professional employees who interract with internal and external customers with tatoos on their neck. They would not last long. That is called not being a "good fit". Enough to terminate at your level and probably get away with it.
Besides, if they think they would lose that arguement they will just come up with a better foolproof way to get rid of you. Either way, you and the company are not a match.
>What you are missing is that there does not have to be anything >written on short hair. There is nothing written in our handbook that >says you can not have a tatoo on your neck. We have employees that >have tatoos on their necks. We do not have any exempt professional >employees who interract with internal and external customers with >tatoos on their neck. They would not last long. That is called not >being a "good fit". Enough to terminate at your level and probably get >away with it. > >Besides, if they think they would lose that arguement they will just >come up with a better foolproof way to get rid of you. Either way, you >and the company are not a match.
Let's see....
Our drivers, who represent the company to our customers can dress like slobs and have long hair. Me, who never sees customers (only internal ones), wears a business suit and other than long hair, is 100% professional. I've always excelled at my job. What would they fire me for?
If I can prove they fired me on long hair alone and it was never even made verbally aware to me that long hair is not acceptable and they just up and fire me, you don't think I would win a wrongful termination lawsuit?
Does anyone else think I wouldn't win? Just curious here, if that's ok with you, Hatchetman.
It doesn't matter whether or not I think you can win (By the way, I don't). I do think it is a shame that you are representing a company, to its employees and employment candidates, for which you hold such little regard. I know you say you do a stellar job but I am not sure how, when you are at such odds with management's beliefs. Surely, your feelings and attitude must be apparent.
Do I believe you have a right to wear your hair long? Hell, yes, but not at a company that is opposed to it.
Do I believe you are wasting your company's time responding to all the forum dialogue? Yes and I will not waste any more of my time on this thread.
I don't think your case would even make it to court. In fact, we would probably read about it in one of those "Can you believe someone filed a suit claiming..." employment newsletters. In fact, your entire position reminds me of the cases my wife deals with on a daily basis - the ones filed by prison inmates who feel they've been wronged because the pen only provides creamy peanut butter and not chunky.
>I don't think your case would even make it to court. In fact, we would >probably read about it in one of those "Can you believe someone filed >a suit claiming..." employment newsletters. In fact, your entire >position reminds me of the cases my wife deals with on a daily basis - >the ones filed by prison inmates who feel they've been wronged because >the pen only provides creamy peanut butter and not chunky.
I only hope I get a defense attorney as dense as this....
As I have read down the postings on this list, although I support your right to personal freedoms, I was dismayed to see that as a member of our profession, you became confrontational, considered ethical violations, i.e., faking religious convictions, and ridiculed those who disagreed with you.
As I see it you have a few decisions to make, 1. Is the issue long hair or personal freedoms? Figure out what you are fighting. Your posts seem to go back and forth. 2. Is HR the field for you? Not only are we in HR held to a higher standard in dress (and yes, at my business, business casual is the order of the day, however we always dress a notch above the norm) but we are also held to consistently demonstrate the behavior we expect of our employees. 3. If you still feel HR is the field for you, then you should look for another employer, perhaps in the high-tech arena where long hair is more frequently seen. Although you may be able to fight in court were you to be discharged for long hair when there is no policy, it would be arduous, and doubtful whether you would win. I also think your manager will look hard for documentable non-performance issues, which given the first paragraph in this reply, I believe she will be able to find.
Comments
>yourself in a senior role in HR and a delivery driver is in my
>opinion, more than justifiable. I mean no offense to delivery
>drivers, but I think it would be hard to argue that the accountability
>and position levels are equal.
Hmmmm...for some reason I feel the image of the company to our customers is a lot more important than the image I project in HR. Don't you?
Yet, for each response that indicated you needed to come to that resolution, you took issue, contending that your employer should change its policy. Your original post even went so far as to indicate that in order to keep your long hair, you were going to change your religious beliefs.
Your asking for suggestions seems to have been a "rouse" to get into an argument to help you justify to yourself why you wanted to keep long hair, jeopardizing your employment. That's your decision. But it seems to me you've got to make some fundamental decisions and look at your priorities.
If your were seeking to resolve a conflict between reporting a friend at work for wrongdoing or not doing anything, for example, I could see the ethical dilemma you'd be faced with. I could see why you would argue your initial position to anyone who gave an opposing view to help you assure yourself of that position or come to the conclusion that your position wasn't the best one for you.
In this case, though, all you are dealing with is a superficial matter, length of hair, versus major components of your life -- your job, your economic status, your career. Your hardened position would be commendable if, as I said, you were faced with real ethical choices. But you're not. You need to look at your priorities, otherwise you may find more problems down the road on other issues.
You basically have three choices, at this point, it seems to me --
1. Cut your hair, stay with your job, and develop your authority in the company where you do have some control over a hair policy. Then get it changed to what you want.
2. Quit your job, keeping your long hair and find another job where long hair is acceptable. Or, keep your long hair on your current job, and see what happens, with the expectation that you will probably get fired.
2a. If you do get fired then find a very good labor lawyer who will take your case and try to win in court on a claim of wrongful termination.
3. Make a "half way" accommodation. Cut your hair but get a wig and stay with your job. Wear the wig off work hours. Or consult a hair stylist to see if it is possible to wear the long hair bunched up under a "short hair wig" and wear the short-hair wig to work.
In any case, I don't see where any more discussion here is going to help you on this matter since you are hardened on your position that you want long hair and you think your employer is absolutely wrong to have the policy that it does.
>to come to an accommodation within yourself to accept your employer's
>grooming standard. Your original post asked for suggestions on what
>you could do given your feelings about wearing long hear and your
>employer's policy prohibiting it.
>
The policy isn't a written one, therefore I feel I can challege it sufficiently and win. If they aren't going to standardize their expectations, then they really can't "punish" someone for not following expectations they never made clear in the first place, can they?
No one told me I couldn't have long hair and I never signed anything that said "I understand it's againt company policy to have long hair on men.."
>In this case, though, all you are dealing with is a superficial
>matter, length of hair, versus major components of your life -- your
To you the matter is superficial. I don't expect you to understand why it's important to me. But know that my second career is music and tradionally men have long hair.
>job, your economic status, your career. Your hardened position would
>be commendable if, as I said, you were faced with real ethical
>choices. But you're not. You need to look at your priorities,
>otherwise you may find more problems down the road on other issues.
>
It is down to ethics. I am a very "fair" person. Sometimes painfully so. If it's not fair to the group then it shouldn't be allowed. Women are allowed long hair or short hair. They are allowed to wear comfortable clothes. Men here are expected to wear TIES and have SHORT hair. I contend this isn't FAIR. It's SEXIST!!
>You basically have three choices, at this point, it seems to me --
>
>1. Cut your hair, stay with your job, and develop your authority in
>the company where you do have some control over a hair policy. Then
>get it changed to what you want.
>
Not going to happen. I have my principals and I am sticking to them. If they fire me for not cutting my hair, they'll have to produce documentation showing I was made aware of that before I was hired. They can't. They also can not use "assumed" rules regarding the length of my hair. That also will not hold up in court. Add in the fact that as an employee, I am consistently rated excellent in my performance....well...they'd have a hard time convincing a judge that they didn't fire me for my length of hair....and therefore wrongfully terminated me.
If they want to make me rich, they are welcomed to fire me over a company policy not written anywhere and one I didn't sign.
>2. Quit your job, keeping your long hair and find another job where
>long hair is acceptable. Or, keep your long hair on your current job,
>and see what happens, with the expectation that you will probably get
>fired.
>
Well, we already know that I am not going to cut my hair.
I am working on changing my career (network administrator) but need more time to be fully prepared. That's a career where hair length is less important.
And honestly I doubt they would fire me here. What they would do is demote me (since they tend to do that here) and should they do that, I would have a meeting with the labor board
> 2a. If you do get fired then find a very good labor lawyer who will
>take your case and try to win in court on a claim of wrongful
>termination.
>
I am confident I would win....easily.
>3. Make a "half way" accommodation. Cut your hair but get a wig and
>stay with your job. Wear the wig off work hours. Or consult a hair
>stylist to see if it is possible to wear the long hair bunched up
>under a "short hair wig" and wear the short-hair wig to work.
>
Actually this is about the only acceptable compromise I would accept. I am going to look for one this weekend in Vegas. I wouldn't tell work about it, I would just start wearing the wig.
Stupid that I have to do this, but then again most companies are still stuck to the irrational thought process that length of hair is equally proportationate to the professionalism of the company....
>In any case, I don't see where any more discussion here is going to
>help you on this matter since you are hardened on your position that
>you want long hair and you think your employer is absolutely wrong to
>have the policy that it does.
Actually it helps me a lot. There are a lot of really nice people who've offered advice. Yourself included. If I seem a bit hardened, it's because I've reached the point where I am sick of hearing how long hair on men is unprofessional, as if it somehow automatically makes me less intelligent *rolleyes*.
I'm sick of stereotypes. I'm sick of people at work claiming to have no predijudces and then staring me in the face saying "long hair on men is unacceptable".
I appreciate your help, really. This is a frustration that's long overdue. I am not mad at anyone here and it's really good to read the responses. At least I know what I am up against and your suggestions may indeed help me come to a quick and easy solution.
Thanks.
>problem with long hair. The issue I believe is whether Jabarian's
>employer can set a dress code standard in which long hair on men
>(absent a bond fide religious or faith-based belief) is not allowed.
>I personally don't care one way or another if Jabarian has long hair.
>But his employer does reserve rights to regulate its own workplace.
>And if he does not have a bona fide protected cause for growing his
>hair long versus just because he likes it, then his employer can
>respond as such.
My employer does not have a written, standardized dress code. I signed no polocies and procedures manual. If long hair is not allowed, then they should make that clear in writing. I have a hard time accepting they can fire me for having long hair when it wasn't made clear it was no allowed WHEN I STARTED this job.
Do you understand my point?
>and he just turned 70 ! He is considered one of the top professionals
>in his field , both nationally and internationally. It is his skills
>that reasonable people really notice, not his hair length.
As with me
Have you even discussed this with your manager or Department/Division head?
Perhaps I'm assuming, but I get the impression there's been little or no dialogue between you and you're managers.
Have you been informed that you will be terminated if you don't cut your hair?
Have you even been "advised" that you should cut your hair?
From reading your messages, you appear to have other problems with your position and the company you work for.
>Have you even discussed this with your manager or Department/Division
>head?
>
Briefly with my Manager to which she said that long hair would never be acceptable in HR.
>Perhaps I'm assuming, but I get the impression there's been little or
>no dialogue between you and you're managers.
>
Little because the hair isn't an issue yet, but it's getting long and soon I'll not be able to hide it anymore. Then I need to make a decision.
>Have you been informed that you will be terminated if you don't cut
>your hair?
No.
>Have you even been "advised" that you should cut your hair?
>
Not yet, but then again I've hidden it very well. If I don't do what I normally do to hide it, it's pretty long.
>From reading your messages, you appear to have other problems with
>your position and the company you work for.
Not really. This is a great place to work. Intellectually it's not very challenging right now as we're in a downsizing mode so there isn't a lot of hiring going on (hence the extra free time to do research). When it get's busy though, it's very fun and challenging work....hair or no hair.
Regarding converting to a religion and getting accomodation. Jabarian, the dialogue on this web site would be used to make the case that, just perhaps, the requested religious accomodation is not bona fide. I will worry about long hair in our HR department just as soon as a long haired person shows up who has a bona fide religious need. Now I'm through.
I could understand your arguement better if you were an hourly employee, but I assume by your position you are exempt. Obviously you and your company are not a good fit. For exempt employees, you do not need a policy violation, or whatever, to terminate someone. Exempt employees are terminated all the time because they are just not compatible with the company. You could argue the Title VII stuff-- but I don't think you would win.
You use the arguement that other less professional looking people see customers 10X more than you do. You are Human Resources-- you have internal customers. If your employer wants you to be as presentable to your internal customers as they do your external customers, I think that is great. It shows the employees that management cares.
Again, I feel there is nothing wrong with long hair on men. But I also feel that a company should have some reasonable expectation that they can dictate some aspects of appearance. I don't see any difference in the nose ring with a chain and the long hair. Either one hardly ever affects job performance but nobody seems to take issue with employer's nixing the nose rings with chains. A poor analogy but...would you conduct business with Hooter's if all their employees could have any appearance they chose as long as it did not affect the performance of their ability to service orders? It is not just the clothes issue-- what if they all wanted to shave their heads (opposite of you)? Would they lose business? Yes. Should the Hooters company have a right (besides religious accomodation) to dictate some appearance issues of their employees if they are afraid they will lose business?
I'm thankful to have a job. I won't do anything unethical, illegal, or against my CURRENT religion for them. But if they say to wear my hair short, I'll take that house payment and car payment money from them and cut my hair.
>I'm thankful to have a job. I won't do anything unethical, illegal, or
>against my CURRENT religion for them. But if they say to wear my hair
>short, I'll take that house payment and car payment money from them
>and cut my hair.
This statement shows how far apart we think.
I'd rather take a less paying job to keep my hair. I work to live, not live to work. Work is career, but not my life. I work to pay the bills but my second career as a musician is my life...and my hair with it. If I can't work this career and pay the bills, I guess I need to switch careers...
I personally believe that as long as you DRESS professionally and tie your hair back, it should be acceptable.
>that being in CA, staff can come come to work any way in which they
>please. My history has been with upscale hospitality, and dress code
>standards are the norm. I have even worked at a Casino, where I
>developed a pretty rigid grooming and appearance standard policy.
>Employees were notified of the standards during orientation and absent
>proof of medical certification or bona fide religious accomodation,
>there were few exceptions made. Again, even if a compamy does not
>have a written policy, the employer still has the right to set policy
>as it deems suitable to its business...
>
If the policy was not made clear before I accepted the job, it is THEN ok for them to fire me based only on the length of my hair? It seems to me I have a case against that....
Please, we have covered every aspect of this issue we possibly could... and then some! Can we move on to another issue?
Margaret Morford
theHRedge
615-371-8200
[email]mmorford@mleesmith.com[/email]
[url]http://www.thehredge.net[/url]
>
>Please, we have covered every aspect of this issue we possibly
>could... and then some! Can we move on to another issue?
>
>Margaret Morford
>theHRedge
>615-371-8200
>mmorford@mleesmith.com
>[url]http://www.thehredge.net[/url]
Well isn't that what a discussion forum is for? I acutally let the thread die for a few days and all the sudden there were 7 replies. I just responded to them. I don't think anyone is at each other's throats and so far, I see a healthy debate.
If you think this is bad, you should see some of the football forums!
Jabarian, there is no healthy debate. You have taken a position, which is your "human right" to do. You have rejected every rationale proffered to you on why your position in the work environment isn't on firm ground. You have been intransigent, which again is your human right. But then be aware if your employer doesn't back down, that in order to prove yourself "legally right" if you can, you'll need to go into court. And there, with "at-will status" employment, and hair not falling under a "civil rights" law, most likely, you will not prevail.
There has been no real healthy debate: Two separate positions - Yours and just about everyone else's.
>this thread.
>
>Jabarian, there is no healthy debate. You have taken a position,
>which is your "human right" to do. You have rejected every rationale
>proffered to you on why your position in the work environment isn't on
>firm ground. You have been intransigent, which again is your human
>right. But then be aware if your employer doesn't back down, that in
>order to prove yourself "legally right" if you can, you'll need to go
>into court. And there, with "at-will status" employment, and hair not
>falling under a "civil rights" law, most likely, you will not prevail.
>
I'll prevail based on what I've said here time and time again. There is NOTHING WRITTEN that says I have to maintain short hair. NOTHING. Our drivers have long hair. Our drivers are OUR employees. If my company decides they want to fire me based on hair length ... a predicent they never set before, I am willing to take YOUR MONEY that not only would I win in court, I would win in a landslide.
Healthy debate? YOU BET!
>There has been no real healthy debate: Two separate positions - Yours
>and just about everyone else's.
You've not read the entire thread, I see. I've accepted varying opinions and some people AGREE with me. I'm not going to lay down just because YOU disagree with me. Please. A healthy debate has both sides discussing the issues. Just because it doesn't follow YOUR idea of a health debate doesn't mean it isn't. If you don't like what I have to say, you are free to skip the thread. You aren't obligated to reply, that's for sure.
Besides, if they think they would lose that arguement they will just come up with a better foolproof way to get rid of you. Either way, you and the company are not a match.
>written on short hair. There is nothing written in our handbook that
>says you can not have a tatoo on your neck. We have employees that
>have tatoos on their necks. We do not have any exempt professional
>employees who interract with internal and external customers with
>tatoos on their neck. They would not last long. That is called not
>being a "good fit". Enough to terminate at your level and probably get
>away with it.
>
>Besides, if they think they would lose that arguement they will just
>come up with a better foolproof way to get rid of you. Either way, you
>and the company are not a match.
Let's see....
Our drivers, who represent the company to our customers can dress like
slobs and have long hair. Me, who never sees customers (only internal
ones), wears a business suit and other than long hair, is 100% professional.
I've always excelled at my job. What would they fire me for?
If I can prove they fired me on long hair alone and it was never even made
verbally aware to me that long hair is not acceptable and they just up and
fire me, you don't think I would win a wrongful termination lawsuit?
Does anyone else think I wouldn't win? Just curious here, if that's ok with
you, Hatchetman.
Do I believe you have a right to wear your hair long? Hell, yes, but not at a company that is opposed to it.
Do I believe you are wasting your company's time responding to all the forum dialogue? Yes and I will not waste any more of my time on this thread.
>probably read about it in one of those "Can you believe someone filed
>a suit claiming..." employment newsletters. In fact, your entire
>position reminds me of the cases my wife deals with on a daily basis -
>the ones filed by prison inmates who feel they've been wronged because
>the pen only provides creamy peanut butter and not chunky.
I only hope I get a defense attorney as dense as this....
As I see it you have a few decisions to make,
1. Is the issue long hair or personal freedoms? Figure out what you are fighting. Your posts seem to go back and forth.
2. Is HR the field for you? Not only are we in HR held to a higher standard in dress (and yes, at my business, business casual is the order of the day, however we always dress a notch above the norm) but we are also held to consistently demonstrate the behavior we expect of our employees.
3. If you still feel HR is the field for you, then you should look for another employer, perhaps in the high-tech arena where long hair is more frequently seen. Although you may be able to fight in court were you to be discharged for long hair when there is no policy, it would be arduous, and doubtful whether you would win. I also think your manager will look hard for documentable non-performance issues, which given the first paragraph in this reply, I believe she will be able to find.
I hope you come to some peace within yourself.