L.A. Times - Harrah's casino in Reno had the right to fire a female bartender because she refused to wear makeup despite the fact that she had consistently high employment evaluations, a sharply divided panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
Harrah's grooming policy that requires women to wear makeup requires men to have neatly trimmed hair that does not extend below the shirt collar and prohibits men from wearing makeup or having long fingernails.
The court ruled that the policy did not place a greater burden on women than on men and, therefore, was not a form of discrimination by sex.
Here are the woman's reasons for not wanting to wear makeup.
According to the court decision, Jespersen tried wearing makeup for a short period of time during the 1980s when doing so was voluntary at Harrah's. But she testified that doing so "made her feel sick, degraded, exposed and violated."
Additionally, the ruling noted, "Jespersen felt that wearing makeup actually interfered with her ability to be an effective bartender (which sometimes required her to deal with unruly, intoxicated guests) because it took away [her] credibility as an individual and as a person."
Businesses have a right to put forth the public image of their choosing. Since employees often represent a major part of that image businesses have every right to dictate how employees should dress and groom themselves while on the job. There are limits, of course, but I don't think that requiring makeup crosses any of those limits.
This woman's case was utter nonsense.