Can "visual pollution" be considered a contributor to a hostile work environment?

Question

My company has had threats of suits regarding sexual harassment, un-safe conditions, and a number regarding the uni-sex bathrooms I was forced to install by the state.

Now a number of my employees are complaining that their work environment is being made hostile by the apperance of some of the other employees. Notably my HR Director. I will admit that she is a most unsightly woman.

Do you think if I hire some very attractive employees to off-set the ugly ones, beauty credits if you will, I can avoid another law suit?

Answer 1

Many different companies, are faced with low moral and poor working practices, and are constantly looking at ways to boost productivity and a more pleasant working atmosphere.

It may be worth your while to adopt one or any number of these ideas, to offset any complications that may arise from your employees.

Consider 'Brown Paper Bag Day', whereby the employees must come to work wearing a brown paper bag over their heads (NB. that using paper products and not plastic, also complies with the Environmental Protection Bill).

Of course this would result in the more attractive members of your workforce being covered up; use a (rigged) draw-of-lots to determine which will be participating in your moral-boosting exercise.

Answer 2

Sounds to me more like you'd do better to hire employees who want to work, not try to make their money suing their employer. With this many lawsuit threats, either something is seriously wrong with the employer, or with the employees -- and if some employees are seriously complaining that their boss needs to act on another employee's being ugly, then I would suspect that it's the lawsuit-happy employee(s) at fault.

Now if the issue with the HR director were more intrusive, such as if she smells bad, that might be an issue to take up with her. Or, if it affects her work and is something that can be changed (for example, if she dresses tackily in too-tight clothes, and so gives your clients or prospective employees a bad impression of your company). That's again something you would have to (carefully) take up with her to try to improve your company's performance. But, I'd tend to think that she has more grounds to sue the complainers for harassment, than they have to sue you over her looks.

If you hire for looks only, you run a risk of lawsuit for bias or harassment, if the reason for hiring becomes known. And you deserve what would likely happen to your business once people hired only on superficial qualities start "working" for you.

Answer 3

NO that is prejudice and unless you make it a job requirement for all employees and create a written standard you can't do it . I have been a administrator for many years hiring and firing dozens of people and I must say by far the cuties expect to get by on their looks and by far are less productive,and need more training (maybe prejudice statement) I am guilty of hiring them for ''front desk'' positions and the plain more qualified, for workers behind the scenes. you are going to create a bad situation if you do anything other than hiring the most qualified for the job!!!

Answer 4

in case you're in the US it rather is a opposed artwork environment yet it rather is illegitimate on condition that the only reason in the back of the ambience is in line with being area of a secure team..... only placed: if the boss is an equivalent hazard jerk then it rather is criminal...... if the boss treats women people this way only using fact they are women people then that's no longer criminal..... breaks are a rely of state regulation and maximum states do no longer mandate any breaks for adults, in each state mandatory extra time and/or schedule differences without or with notice are criminal

Answer 5

Sexual harrassment and unsafe conditions can get you involved in a lawsuit. The physical appearance cannot, unless you dismiss someone for that reason.