header-logo header-logo

Tidy-hair policy not prejudicial

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

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

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll