Braids/Dread Locks
5560905
37 Posts
I work for a small hotel organization. Our appearance standard indicates that braided hair (for Bellmen/Valets) is acceptable as long as it is braided close to the scalp and the braids do not extend below the shirt collar. No beads or adornments are allowed. Employees with braided hair must wear a uniform cap (which we provide).
Recently, some of our employees have gone to the extreme with the braids - one has full shoulder length dread locks (not a Rasta, so religion is not an issue). Two employees have acquired this hairstyle AFTER they were hired. The other was told he would have to change his hair when he was hired, but his manager did not enforce our appearance standard. Our CEO and owner has requested that we revisit the hair style issue with all Bellstaff and Valet employees and has pointed out that the larger hotels (Ritz Carlton, Wyndham, Hilton) do not have any employees with such hair styles and he does not want us to allow it either.
Since some of our managers have been lax in enforcing our appearance standard to this point, do I have a problem in revisiting this with employees? I suspect I may have 3 who will not want to comply.
We're in the process of changing uniforms for these positions and I thought perhaps we could incorporate the hair regulations with the new uniform distribution.
Am I opening up a can of worms here? Should I try to convince my CEO that he should allow more flexibility with hairstyles? I feel like I'm in a no win situation.
HELP!!!!
Recently, some of our employees have gone to the extreme with the braids - one has full shoulder length dread locks (not a Rasta, so religion is not an issue). Two employees have acquired this hairstyle AFTER they were hired. The other was told he would have to change his hair when he was hired, but his manager did not enforce our appearance standard. Our CEO and owner has requested that we revisit the hair style issue with all Bellstaff and Valet employees and has pointed out that the larger hotels (Ritz Carlton, Wyndham, Hilton) do not have any employees with such hair styles and he does not want us to allow it either.
Since some of our managers have been lax in enforcing our appearance standard to this point, do I have a problem in revisiting this with employees? I suspect I may have 3 who will not want to comply.
We're in the process of changing uniforms for these positions and I thought perhaps we could incorporate the hair regulations with the new uniform distribution.
Am I opening up a can of worms here? Should I try to convince my CEO that he should allow more flexibility with hairstyles? I feel like I'm in a no win situation.
HELP!!!!
Comments
I would just have a simple, straight forward talk with the managers letting them know exactly what has "come down the pipe" regarding this and what action will be taken if rules/policies are not followed (whatever action that may be according to your policies). The CEO says xyz needs to happen and the managers need to abide by it, period. I would then have them deal with their own employees on their own. They're managers and you shouldn't have to babysit them. If their employees continue to break the rules, the manager as well as the employee should have to answer for it.
If you are going to be the one to talk to these employees, I'd remind them that they knew of the dress code policy when they were hired and it continues to be an expectation of the job that they abide by the code. If they disagree, I'd advise them it was time to look for another position.
Locked hair is not quite the same as braided hair. Your policy does not appear to address locked hair at all. It may address hair length, and hopefully includes other types of hair as well. Would long blonde curls be acceptable? If it does not exclude them you best not exclude long locks.
Sorry guys, this subject is not as simple as it seems. Braided hairstyles have been addressed in the courts by employees who felt it a double standard to ban braids, primarily because basically Black people wear them. And they won! Same goes for locks, in my humble opinion. Asking someone to cut their locks is like asking them to lighten their skin or change the shape of their nose. It is offensive.
Yes, the company has a right to demand neatness, a uniform, a dress policy that is equally enforced, etc., but not the right to change a natural characteristic of a person.
My beautiful locks are neat and very professional, and I would not dare cut them off for a job. My daughter (Medical School) and my niece (finishing Yale Law School) feel the same way about theirs.
If my company's policy on hair style was "conservative" that means EVERYONE who accepted employment has to abide by the rules.
You can be your own persona on days off, vacation and weekends. I may not like to wear safety shoes, safety eye glasses, hard hat or face masks but it goes with the territory.
If you are in an industry that caters to the public, it is vital that the presentation made accommodates the impression you are trying to establish.
Perhaps I was not as clear as I could have been. My point is that that professionals (and those preparing for the professions of my personal acquaintance) wear locks. There is nothing inherently unprofessional about them.
Safety equipment, and indeed dress/uniform codes are in a different category and you get no argument from me about that kind of requirement. Requiring a "neat" appearance is also in the purview of the employer.
You state:
"If you are in an industry that caters to the public, it is vital that the presentation made accommodates the impression you are trying to establish."
You can certainly open a door, carry in luggage and/or assist customers professionally --with or without locked hair.
Requiring a person to not have locked hair is discrimination and I can not think of one good reason to do so. Assuming that there is something inherently wrong with locked and/or braided hair is indeed the problem.
The point is the image the owner wants to establish. No one has indicated that locks are unprofessional. It is just not the look, the impression, the public image, the portrayal he wishes to present to his customers and clients. That is his preferance and his right.
Yes, you are right -- I missed that point entirely. Probably has something to do with the fact that I grew up in a climate of people who regulated who they hired based on color when I was coming up. There is little difference to me in that and banning natural hair styles.
If an owner is banning locks and braids the owner is going beyond his "right" to conduct his/her business. As HR professionals we had better pay attention to these things. I really can not see what BFOQ it addresses. The owner has no "right" to regulate my natural hair.
Braids would be a hair style -- there are all kinds.
Locks/locked, etc., is a way of wearing natural hair that avoids combs/brushes, etc. It can be trained into "locks" by twisting and/or braiding.
The term dreadlocks is generally avoided because of the connotation of "evil/spirit/religious" -- expecially as it related to some West Indian wearers.
Bottom line, and thank Almighty there are employers that recognize quality in people for what they are and not what they look like. If a hairstyle is not a safety hazard, then let it be. I am professional Native American with braids to my waist. I wouldn't think twice about cutting my braids or hiding them to satisfy an employer who doesn't realize they have customers as different than the standard they attempt to set.
My advice, yes, revisit your policy or make a bunch of new ones to solve all your hair problems, and then prepare to make new ones with the next wave of generational change that our kids without doubt will once again prompt your need to once again judge.
Perhaps if you take the high road when explaining it to the employees ( & yes, I'd do it in concert with the new uniform). There are good reasons why you have the rule--competition in your industry must be extreme. What's in it for them. The public comes to your place to stay and doesn't go elsewhere. It's job security. Staff is part of a hotel's image. Hopefully, they are interested in keeping up or improving that image.
I've found employees will be reasonable if you explain things well.
For private sector employers, you don't have this issue, although I would consider Dasher's comments with respect to uniformly applying your dress code. How do you apply these rules to female employees? I assume the "above the collar" rule does not apply to females? Your policy should definitely include some ability to regulate not just for braids and/or locks, but also for any hairstyle that is considered distracting, etc, such as mohawks and the like.
Just curious, but do you similarly regulate for piercings and/or tattoos??
We don't target one area such as dreadlocks, braids, or whatever...anything that is too extreme (purple hair, nose rings, large, visible tatoos, midriff tops, low slung jeans) are prohibited as being unprofessional in our work environment.
I agree if just one race was involved or "targeted", there may be some cause for alarm, but when applied uniformly...I see no issues.
Dasher: one more comment. I have seen some very attractive long braids on both male and females which, we would certainly accept. I have also seen some styles that look like James Brown's mugshot and that would definitely NOT be acceptable, no matter what the ethnicity of the individual was.
There is no way of really knowing that the employees want to push the envelope -- perhaps they just want to have natural hair. It is not a crime and should be a non-issue.
How do you address someone with long un-braided hair? Would it be acceptable for hair to remain shoulder length if it were put in a ponytail?
Braided hair pulled back would have a similar appearance to the current dress-code allowed "braided to the scalp". My suggestion would be a compromise of loose braids (and all long hair) must be pulled back and/or accompanied w/ a hat.
Also, if you're going to go there... you need to be specific about what is considered extreme, and be prepared to add something new each week. Do you address hair color, images or designs shaved in short cuts, someone already mentioned mohawks, etc.
The employees in question have hair that is bulky and would not fit under a cap. Additionally they complain that a cap breaks their hair and want to wear a do-rag or skull cap over the hair with the hat on it....which is definitely not in keeping with our professional image.
Because some employees do not maintain their locks or braids, we now have issues of subjectivity - is the employee's hair acceptable or not? We are trying to present a professional image and one that makes our guests feel safe and secure.
>they just want to have natural hair.
Just curious, I have never seen hair that grows naturally braided or locked. Perhaps there is another term you want to use other than natural. To my narrow minded thinking natural implies that you don't have to alter it by either braiding or locking it.
It took me a long time myself to come to terms with issues surrounding hair. It has more ramifications than I can relate to you here. Those who do not have to deal with "unacceptable because of the way I am created" can not be expected to appreciate these issues easily. I am no more perfect about this than others.
The original poster who brought this matter to the forum is to be applauded. Our younger generations do not have (thank goodness) some of the hangups those of us over a certain age may have. By that I mean that like it or not you will see more and more "natural haired" people and it would be a shame to allow our organizations to miss out on their talent because of perceptions about hair texture.
It seems that this thread has taken turns that were not related to the original question but I see that as positive, as well. One of my favorite quote goes something like "Everybody who looks like you is not your friend, but everybody who does not look like you is not your enemy either."
We are talking. Thanks.
Don, to be perfectly honest about this I would probably do what we do when considering anyone for employment -- at times an interviewee comes in and (whether it is education, skills, dress, speech, thought patterns, hair) they will not fit into the culture of the organization.
And LeeR, my narrow-minded friend, their is indeed a difference between altering a natural state (the chemical application most Caucasians find acceptable), and grooming hair in its natural state (i.e., braids and locks).
Our rules state no visible body piercing EXCEPT for pierced ears and then only one earring per ear for females. Male employees are not allowed to wear earrings on the job. We specifically prohibit any facial piercing such pierced eyebrows, nose rings, tongue studs, etc. for all employees. Ear Plugs are not allowed either for any employee.
Tattoos must be covered.
Female employees may wear braids or extensions as long as they are naturally colored and match their hair color (whether natural or chemically colored). In cases of long hair on females it must be pulled back away from the face and may not hang or droop in their eyes. No extreme hair colors are allowed, i.e. the hair color they select must be a naturally occuring color - green, burgundy, hot pink are not allowed.
We also porhibit assymetical or bi-level styles, and shaved designs. Shaving of eyebrowns in unacceptable. Temporary painted on or sprayed on color is also unacceptable.