Hair Discrimination Update II
Hair Discrimination Update II
Author: Jenna White | San Francisco Hairstylist
September 16th, 2021
September 16th, 2021
Corporate image or discrimination? With bipartisan support, U.S. states are lining up to consider laws that support an individual's preference on how they style their hair at school and work. For years dress codes have discriminated against hair styles commonly associated with African American and Black cultures. The CROWN Act addresses just that. This is our third update acknowledging the progress it has made across the country after our first two posts, Hair Discrimination and Hair Discrimination Update.
What the CROWN Act Is and Why It's Important
The Crown Act was first introduced in California on July 3rd, 2019. Since then, 11 states and 31 cities and counties have enacted it. The act prohibits race based hair discrimination linked to natural hair textures and styles in schools and the workplace. The original Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1969 meant to protect against similar types of discrimination has left gaps in many court cases. For example, in 2013 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in Alabama against a company that told an African American job applicant that in order to accept her job offer, she would need to cut her dreadlocks because they violated the company's grooming policy. She refused, and the offer was rescinded. According to Fisher Phillips, a law firm based in Atlanta that represents court cases related to labor, employment, civil rights, employee benefits, and immigration law, the court dismissed the case because “Title VII protects persons in covered categories with respect to their immutable characteristics, but not their cultural practices". Put another way, the court felt that the company was not in violation of Title VII because hair is a characteristic that can be changed.
Now, many states and organizations are contributing to the growing voice of hair equality, with the CROWN Act specifically adding that discrimination includes hair bias “if that hair texture or that hairstyle is commonly associated with a particular race or natural origin.” The text of the legislation highlights “braids, locs, twists, tight coils or curls, cornrows, bantu knots, afros, weaves, wigs or head wraps.” This is a crucial change in legal protection against discrimination because unfair judgement and marginalization due to hairstyle preference has been a frequent experience. Check out the court cases and stories below.
Now, many states and organizations are contributing to the growing voice of hair equality, with the CROWN Act specifically adding that discrimination includes hair bias “if that hair texture or that hairstyle is commonly associated with a particular race or natural origin.” The text of the legislation highlights “braids, locs, twists, tight coils or curls, cornrows, bantu knots, afros, weaves, wigs or head wraps.” This is a crucial change in legal protection against discrimination because unfair judgement and marginalization due to hairstyle preference has been a frequent experience. Check out the court cases and stories below.
Hair-Related Discrimination Court Cases
Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Insurance, No. 75-1231., September 1975
ROGERS vs. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC, No. 81 Civ. 4474., December 1981
- Charge: violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 due to an African American employee being explicitly denied a promotion after starting to wear a natural hairstyle, along with other acts of discrimination that involved additional employees
- Appeals Ruling: according to The Scoop on the California Crown Act: "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld a race discrimination lawsuit against an employer for bias against afros in the case of Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Insurance. The appeals court agreed that workers were entitled to wear afros under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act."
ROGERS vs. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC, No. 81 Civ. 4474., December 1981
- Charge: violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 due to the airline banning all braided hairstyles among employees
- Ruling: " . . . the grooming policy applies equally to members of all races, and plaintiff does not allege that an all-braided hair style is worn exclusively or even predominantly by black people. Moreover, it is proper to note that defendants have alleged without contravention that plaintiff first appeared at work in the all-braided hairstyle on or about September 25, 1980, soon after the style had been popularized by a white actress [Bo Derek] in the film '10.' Affidavit of Robert Zurlo."
Hair-Related Discrimination Stories
- The Messed-Up Reason This Girl Got Suspended for Wearing Her Natural Hair, by Maya Allen, February 2016
- Black Students Say They Are Being Penalized for their Hair, and Experts Say Every Student is Worse Off Because of It, by Leah Asmelash, March 2020
- For Black Workers, An Unwelcome Workplace Focus on Their Hair, by Khristopher J. Brooks, December 2020
Changes Being Made
To address the CROWN Act legislation changes, schools and workplaces are taking the following actions:
Source: The Roots Of The CROWN Act: What Employers Need To Know About Hairstyle Discrimination Law, April 2020
- Adjusting the wording in grooming policies to focus on employee cleanliness and professional dress codes
- Applying all dress code and appearance policies equally across the organization
- Educating staff members at all levels of grooming policy changes
- Retraining individuals responsible for hiring or admissions
Source: The Roots Of The CROWN Act: What Employers Need To Know About Hairstyle Discrimination Law, April 2020
●●●●●●●●●
The CROWN Act Became Law Since Last Update (Feb 2020)
The CROWN Act Was Law Before Last Update (Feb 2020)
California (July 2019)
New York (July 2019) |
New Jersey (December 2019)
Virginia (March 2020) |
Colorado (March 2020)
Washington (March 2020) |
Maryland (May 2020)
|
The CROWN Act Has Been Filed or Pre-filed
Massachusetts
Oregon
Missouri (The CROWN Act is law in Kansas City and St. Louis)
The CROWN Act Has Not Been Filed
Alaska
Montana |
Illinois
Wyoming |
Idaho
North Dakota |
Hawaii
Rhode Island |
Michigan (The CROWN Act is law in Ann Arbor, Ingham County, and Genesee County)
North Carolina (The CROWN Act is law in Durham, Orange County, and Greensboro)
Ohio (The CROWN Act is law in Newburgh Heights, Akron, Columbus, and Cincinnati)
Pennsylvania (The CROWN Act is law in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh)
Wisconsin (The CROWN Act is law in Dane County)
North Carolina (The CROWN Act is law in Durham, Orange County, and Greensboro)
Ohio (The CROWN Act is law in Newburgh Heights, Akron, Columbus, and Cincinnati)
Pennsylvania (The CROWN Act is law in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh)
Wisconsin (The CROWN Act is law in Dane County)
The CROWN Act Has Been Filed But Did Not Pass
Alabama
Arkansas Indiana Iowa |
Kansas
Maine Minnesota Mississippi |
New Hampshire
Oklahoma South Carolina South Dakota |
Tennessee
Texas Utah Vermont |
Arizona (The CROWN Act is law in Tucson)
Florida (The CROWN Act is law in Broward County)
Kentucky (The CROWN Act is law in Covington and Louisville)
Louisiana (The CROWN Act is law in New Orleans and Shreveport)
Georgia (The CROWN Act is law in Clayton County, Stockbridge, and East Point)
West Virginia (The CROWN Act is law in Beckley, Charleston, Lewisburg, and Morgantown)
Florida (The CROWN Act is law in Broward County)
Kentucky (The CROWN Act is law in Covington and Louisville)
Louisiana (The CROWN Act is law in New Orleans and Shreveport)
Georgia (The CROWN Act is law in Clayton County, Stockbridge, and East Point)
West Virginia (The CROWN Act is law in Beckley, Charleston, Lewisburg, and Morgantown)
Source: About The CROWN Act, www.thecrownact.com
The CROWN Act Became Law Since Last Update (Feb 2020)
- Connecticut (March 4th, 2021)
- New Mexico (April 5th, 2021)
- Delaware (April 13th, 2021)
- Nebraska (May 5th, 2021)
- Nevada (June 4th, 2021)
The CROWN Act Was Law Before Last Update (Feb 2020)
- California (July 2019)
- New York (July 2019)
- New Jersey (December 2019)
- Virginia (March 2020)
- Colorado (March 2020)
- Washington (March 2020)
- Maryland (May 2020)
The CROWN Act Has Been Filed or Pre-filed
- Massachusetts
- Oregon
- Missouri (The CROWN Act is law in Kansas City and St. Louis)
The CROWN Act Has Not Been Filed
- Alaska
- Montana
- Illinois
- Wyoming
- Hawaii
- Rhode Island
- Idaho
- North Dakota
- Michigan (The CROWN Act is law in Ann Arbor, Ingham County, and Genesee County)
- North Carolina (The CROWN Act is law in Durham, Orange County, and Greensboro)
- Ohio (The CROWN Act is law in Newburgh Heights, Akron, Columbus, and Cincinnati)
- Pennsylvania (The CROWN Act is law in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh)
- Wisconsin (The CROWN Act is law in Dane County)
The CROWN Act Has Been Filed But Did Not Pass
- Alabama
- Arkansas
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Maine
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- New Hampshire
- Oklahoma
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Arizona (The CROWN Act is law in Tucson)
- Florida (The CROWN Act is law in Broward County)
- Kentucky (The CROWN Act is law in Covington and Louisville)
- Louisiana (The CROWN Act is law in New Orleans and Shreveport)
- Georgia (The CROWN Act is law in Clayton County, Stockbridge, and East Point)
- West Virginia (The CROWN Act is law in Beckley, Charleston, Lewisburg, and Morgantown)
Source: About The CROWN Act, www.thecrownact.com