EEOC/attractiveness?

Question

I am writing a paper regarding hiring processes of companies, ex. Hooters, Abercrombie and Fitch, Hot Topic, etc (the employees look similar). I was wondering if they are "allowed" to hire based on attractiveness and/or looks, or if it is against EEOC. I looked at EEOC's regulations and found nothing for attractiveness/looks, only found national origin, race, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm asking if anyone has had previous experience with this issue...hiring based on looks, being the employee or employer, and if you know if its listed under EEOC rules... thank you!

Answer 1

To answer your question, they can but is not ethical.

Recall the basic rights of the Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act: X is an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER. It is X's policy that all applicants be considered solely on the basis of qualifications and ability. Without regard to race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin, disability or veteran status. First, It does not say anything about looks. Second, that a company will not tell you that you were not hired because of "looks"; in fact, most companies really do not give you a reason why they did not hire you or will give you a made up excuse. This is especially true for your low level entry employees (such as the ones that will work at the store or front of the house type activities).

Hooters has an exception, they have what is called a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) A BFOQ allows an employer to violate the Title 7 rights if the employer has a "responsible necessary" For Hooters, their image requires its servers to be women, hence, they can violate the discrimination by sex provision. You see BFOQs everywhere, such as nurses and doctors that work fertility protection or where a customer has a preference with dealing with one sex.

Answer 2

Well, companies can discriminate on the basis of looks...one of the most well known that does is Disney. They call it the "Disney Look"...it's basically a dress code, but up until recently, Disney discriminated against overweight people(very publicly). More on the Disney Look.

http://www.dcljobs.com/lookmale.asp

Basically, they aren't ever going to come out and say it, but most companies do discriminate on the basis of appearance. You aren't going to show up at a company looking unkempt and slovenly and get the job. You won't get hired as a Hooters girl if you're not a cute, perky looking woman(a man did try to sue and failed).

http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/stupid_lawsuit_detail.asp?stupid_ID=18

Similarly, if you don't look "with it" you won't get hired at Abercrombie or Hot Topic. Both companies have a different standard of "cool", but if you're a nerd in white sneakers and Kmart clothes, you probably won't cut it.

Just recently, on the show "Miami Ink", a woman showed up to interview for the tattoo shop manager position. She had no tattoos and did not look the part at all. They turned her down flat. Maybe she'd be a good manager, but the image isn't right. Companies have the right to discern whether you're a good fit for them. People naturally gravitate towards attractive people, but especially when the salespeople are in part selling an "idea" of coolness, good looking people are going to be favored.

Answer 3

It is acceptable to "discriminate" based on attractiveness, or lack thereof, because they are not a protected class.

Models are hired based on their looks and it's no problem. Taking that one step further, companies like A&F or Hooters not only hire people based on experience, but also what their company's image is.

Further, if someone is sloppily dressed, he wouldn't get hired at A&F store no matter how qualified he was. On the other hand, someone who looks like they just stepped out of a A&F catalog may not get hired at Hot Topic.

Answer 4

All corporation discriminate on looks, martial status, # of children, whether you live with your parents, etc. Trust me my sister has worked 3 HR jobs in the last 12 years with different Fortune 500 companies and all these things are discussed by the hiring commitees behind closed doors even though its illegal......TRUST NO ONE!!!!

Answer 5

equal opportunity employment uz just a ufimism for a quota ssystem of slackers and minoriotiures who are ugly and not work in thed viusible positions of customers.