Compliance with Hairstyle Discrimination Laws

October 7, 2019 Advisory

Prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of hairstyle has become a growing trend across the United States. The New York City Commission on Human Rights issued guidance on this subject early in 2019, and over the summer, California and New York passed laws expressly banning such discrimination. Last month, New Jersey joined this movement when the state’s Division on Civil Rights (DCR) published guidance confirming that the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination bars employers, housing providers and places of public accommodation from discriminating on the basis of hairstyle.

DCR guidance indicates that New Jersey law’s prohibition of hairstyle discrimination will be interpreted:

  • “with a particular focus on hairstyles closely associated with Black people,” and
  • to make it unlawful to enforce “grooming or appearance policies that ban, limit, or restrict hairstyles closely associated with Black people, including, but not limited to, twists, braids, cornrows, Afros, locs, Bantu knots, and fades.”

While states have only recently begun to target hairstyle discrimination explicitly, the EEOC has long interpreted federal antidiscrimination law to prohibit employers from discriminating against applicants and employees on the basis of hairstyles that are common within certain minority communities. For example, the EEOC’s Compliance Manual warns that hairstyle rules must “respect racial differences in hair textures and [be] applied evenhandedly.”

Some states, however, have signaled a more aggressive approach to this issue, which should prompt employers to review their personnel policies and antidiscrimination training to mitigate risks of hairstyle discrimination claims. Recently published DCR guidance notes that hairstyle discrimination may be disguised with language “rooted in white, European standards of beauty” and that stereotyping “traditionally Black hairstyles” as “unprofessional,” “unkempt,” “matted” or “messy” may be unlawful. For these reasons, some common employee policies and rules, such as “professional appearance” and “grooming” policies, may need to be clarified to avoid a discriminatory inference.

Armstrong Teasdale’s Employment and Labor practice routinely guides employers in their efforts to comply with discrimination and harassment laws and will issue additional alerts as these laws continue to change. With a national Employment and Labor practice, Armstrong Teasdale is well equipped to address the evolving obligations of U.S. employers.

Contact Us
  • Worldwide
  • Denver, CO
  • Jefferson City, MO
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Las Vegas, NV
  • New York, NY
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • St. Louis, MO
Worldwide
abstract image of world map
Denver, CO
4643 S. Ulster St.
Suite 800
Denver, CO 80237
Google Maps
Denver, Colorado
Jefferson City, MO
3405 W. Truman Boulevard
Suite 210
Jefferson City, MO 65109
Google Maps
Jefferson City, Missouri
Kansas City, MO
2345 Grand Blvd.
Suite 1500
Kansas City, MO 64108
Google Maps
Kansas City, Missouri
Las Vegas, NV
3770 Howard Hughes Parkway
Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89169
Google Maps
Las Vegas, Nevada
New York, NY
919 Third Ave., 37th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Google Maps
New York City
Philadelphia, PA
2005 Market Street
29th Floor, One Commerce Square
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Google Maps
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
St. Louis, MO
7700 Forsyth Blvd.
Suite 1800
St. Louis, MO 63105
Google Maps
St. Louis, Missouri