Jokes1 min ago
Employer's Rights
My friend has found the perfect employee and needs to make a quick decision as to whether to offer him the job or not. One issue - the potential employee has cheek and ear tunnels.
Can my friend insist he wear the caps/fillers whatever they are called at all times he is at work?
He was been interviewed twice and at one interview his tunnels were open.
Can my friend insist he wear the caps/fillers whatever they are called at all times he is at work?
He was been interviewed twice and at one interview his tunnels were open.
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by barry1010. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I am unsure of the legal position here, but I would suggest that your friend can deny employment, and is not obliged to offer a reason.
If he does offer employment, and has the conditions you advise, then your friend should be able to enforce them, as long as the same rule applies to all employees in a similar position - failure to comply could lead to a discrinination claim.
Are there reasons why the caps need to be in place - is the potential employee customer facing?
Your friend should have a reason why he would wish for the tunnels to be capped, and it should be reasonable, within th terms of the post offered.
If he does offer employment, and has the conditions you advise, then your friend should be able to enforce them, as long as the same rule applies to all employees in a similar position - failure to comply could lead to a discrinination claim.
Are there reasons why the caps need to be in place - is the potential employee customer facing?
Your friend should have a reason why he would wish for the tunnels to be capped, and it should be reasonable, within th terms of the post offered.
naomi - // Dress codes are often incorporated into employment contracts. I guess this could be one of those times. //
They are, but I believe they are required to be deemed reasonable.
I recall a new dpeartment in BT where the employees where advised that jeans were not allowed as office attire.
A group of them challenged the rule as they were not customer-facing, so dress within reason was optional, and the rule was dropped.
They are, but I believe they are required to be deemed reasonable.
I recall a new dpeartment in BT where the employees where advised that jeans were not allowed as office attire.
A group of them challenged the rule as they were not customer-facing, so dress within reason was optional, and the rule was dropped.
Not all discrimination is unlawful. An employer is free to discriminate against anyone in his employment practices unless such discrimination is outlawed by specific legislation. (For example, while he can't refuse to employ black applicants, he can have a policy of never employing people who wear blue or refusing work to people with crew cuts). So an employer is free to say either "I won't employ anyone with piercings" or "I won't employ anyone who leaves those piercings open".
He can then include a similar condition within any contract that he might offer to an employee.
He can then include a similar condition within any contract that he might offer to an employee.
yes the employer can provided its a common requirement for all employees. I don't know if its still the case but where I worked (NHS) we had requirements for all such visible piercings to be covered, not just capped and no facial tatts unless covered with makeup. Small earrings and nose studs could be worn by either gender, oral piercings had to be such that they didn't interfere with speech and no piercings linked by chains that could be a safety risk.
// I would assume that anyone who would under go such procedures may have some sort of mental issues & I wouldn't employ them. They must have realised it could cause problems when they had it done - as with blatant tattooing. //
That's a pretty hefty book/cover/judgement interface you've got going on there!
Hundreds of the musicians I have met over the years have 'blatant' tattooing' as you phrase it.
By definition, if I am meeting them, it's because they have reached a level in their creativity and professional success to be selling significant amounts of music to large international audiences.
Some of them may have 'some sort of mental issues', but the majority are charming pleasant highly intelligent people, whose professional and personal progress has clearly unhindered by the levels of blatant stereotyping that you seem to find acceptable.
That's a pretty hefty book/cover/judgement interface you've got going on there!
Hundreds of the musicians I have met over the years have 'blatant' tattooing' as you phrase it.
By definition, if I am meeting them, it's because they have reached a level in their creativity and professional success to be selling significant amounts of music to large international audiences.
Some of them may have 'some sort of mental issues', but the majority are charming pleasant highly intelligent people, whose professional and personal progress has clearly unhindered by the levels of blatant stereotyping that you seem to find acceptable.
In show business and the "arts" it's probably quite acceptable to adapt your appearance to make yourself more colourful/noticeable. For the rest of us it can be a definite disadvantage. When did you last see a doctor with cheek tunnels or a barrister with a heavily tattooed face & LOVE/HATE on his knuckles?
1 to 13 of 13
