header-logo header-logo

25 October 2007
Issue: 7294 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

Tidy-hair policy not prejudicial

News

A dreadlocked Rastafarian who was fired for his messy hair has lost his Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) discrimination claim.

The EAT backed the original tribunal finding that the claimant,  J Harris, who worked as an driver for NKL Automotive, had not suffered direct or indirect discrimination on the grounds of his philosophical beliefs, as he claimed.
The case was sent back to the tribunal to consider the question of victimisation discrimination.

Harris complained that he was getting less work than other agency drivers and that, unlike some other agency workers, he had not been taken on as a full-time employee.

He believed he was being discriminated against because of his hair, which he wore in dreadlocks, “in accordance with his Rastafarian beliefs”. Harris’s lawyer argued that the requirement to have tidy hair itself was prejudicial to Rastafarians but the EAT disagreed.

“That presupposes that [NKL] takes the view that dreadlocked hair is necessarily untidy,” it said. “If dreadlocks are compatible with tidy hair, or can be kept in a tidy manner, then the criterion does not in any way discriminate against those with dreadlocks.”

Pinsent Masons employment lawyer, Andrea Paxton, says the case serves as a useful reminder to employers to check their dress codes and equal opportunities policies.

Issue: 7294 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll