Hair Discrimination Update
Hair Discrimination Update
Author: Jenna White | San Francisco Hairstylist
July 18th, 2020
July 18th, 2020
I did a blog post in February of 2020 about discriminating against someone's hair type at school or in the workplace. The lack of protection around this feels negligent, considering it has been a federal offense to discriminate against someone for their race, sex, color, religion and national origin since 1964 (EEOC Timeline). The absence of hair in that legislation is rapidly changing, with 7 of the 50 states in the USA having passed a bill into law called the CROWN Act. CROWN stands for "Create a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural Hair". Founded in early 2019, the bill prohibits race-based hair discrimination in the form of denying employment or education opportunities because of hair texture or preferred style. A map of the current status of the bill in each state across the USA as of July 18th, 2020 is included below.
Status of the CROWN Act Across the USA
Source: About The CROWN Act, www.thecrownact.com
Timeline (Past & Future) for CROWN Act Adoption as of July 18th, 2020
Timeline (Past & Future) for CROWN Act Adoption as of July 18th, 2020
California was the first state to pass the CROWN Act into law on July 3rd, 2019, which is now celebrated as National CROWN Day (9). If you're unsure of just how important this act is for a better society, consider the following stories. I've purposely featured older ones to show this is not a new development. The most recent victim of this form of discrimination mentioned in the news was DeAndre Arnold, whose story I detailed in my original blog post Hair Discrimination, published on February 13th, 2020.
Massachusetts Mystic Valley Regional Charter School
In 2017, The Mystic Valley Regional Charter School subjected several young Black women to detention and the threat of suspension for wearing their hair in braided extensions. When reporters asked school officials to explain why this was happening, they released the following statement: “One important reason for our students’ success is that we purposefully promote equity by focusing on what unites our students and reducing visible gaps between those of different means" (10). The school's point was that extensions are expensive, and therefore could not be afforded by everyone, which influenced their decision to ban them.
However, the school's policy also prohibits hair coloring, and Deanna Cook, the adoptive mother of two Black daughters who attend Mystic Valley, has observed white students with color in their hair that have not been spoken to or reprimanded. This led her to feel that the disciplinary action being taken over hair extensions is aimed at Black students, who make up 17% of the student population (10). Annette Namuddu, also the mother of a Black daughter attending the school, agrees. “I see white kids with colored hair and you are not supposed to color your hair, and they walk around like it’s nothing" she said (10). At the time, her daughter was coming home from school crying, saying that she felt the school was picking on her and other Black children. The psychological impact of an experience like this at such a young age is horrifying to think about. The resulting disciplinary actions forced Black children to show up early for school and to stay late for detention, meaning less sleep and loss of ability to participate in school activities. This story has a happy ending though, the school's policy was quickly dropped two days after "Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey asked the school to immediately end its ban on certain hairstyles that she said illegally singled out students of color" (11).
North Carolina Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
Kimberly Tigner sued Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools for "'racially motivated criticism and bullying' she allegedly experienced starting in 2015 as a career development liaison for the Career and Technical Education Department" (12). Tigner's supervisor and team members circulated a petition requesting that she not be allowed to wear her hair naturally at work, calling its appearance unprofessional and inappropriate (13). Tigner was the only Black woman on her team at the time. The supervisor also used the school's district directory to research Tigner's 17-year-old son after he stopped by his mother's work. She was told he was not allowed back on the school's property until Tigner could provide proof that he was not a felon, a process that took two weeks. It was not customary for staff family members to undergo this type of background check.
The lawsuit was filed as a harassment case, and in October of 2019 (four years later) a North Carolina judge ruled the acts carried out by Tigner's work colleagues as "objectionable behavior" but not "discrimination", despite Tigner being a Black woman facing this treatment from a group of white co-workers. The attorneys representing the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools claimed that the complaint filed in the case "failed to point to an official policy or practice of racial discrimination" (12). Tigner's own attorney asked to withdraw as her counsel on October 15th, 2019, suggesting questionable loyalty and representation. My heart breaks when I read this story, because it demonstrates the limited understanding our nation has around cultural representation through hair, along with the psychological and professional impact that can have on someone's life. The outcome of this lawsuit is a perfect example of where the CROWN Act could have made a difference, particularly if it were to one day join EEOC legislation at the federal level. North Carolina has yet to introduce and pursue legislation around the CROWN Act.
Additional Resources
Sources
- Crown Act: Newsom signs law that protects against hair discrimination, ABC7 News, July 3rd, 2019
- With a New Amendment, New York State Quietly Joins California in Fighting Hair Discrimination, The Root, July 17th, 2019
- New Jersey becomes third state to ban discrimination based on hair, CBS News, December 21st, 2019
- Maryland Legislature Passes Hairstyle Discrimination, Facial Recognition in Hiring, Retaliation, and Equal Pay Laws, Ogletree Deakins, June 1st, 2020
- States are banning discrimination against black hairstyles. For some lawmakers, it’s personal., The Washington Post, March 16th, 2020
- It's official: Virginia is now the fourth state to ban hair discrimination, CNN, March 5th, 2020
- Colorado becomes 5th state to ban natural hair discrimination, The Denver Post, March 6th, 2020
- Governor signs Morgan bill to prohibit hair discrimination, The Suburban Times, March 22nd, 2020
- About The CROWN Act, www.thecrownact.com
- Black Malden charter students punished for braided hair extensions, The Boston Globe, May 11th, 2017
- Malden School That Punished Black Students For Hair Extensions Drops Policy For Now, WBUR, May 22nd, 2017
- Black woman’s hair was called ‘unprofessional.’ NC judge says it’s not discrimination, The Charlotte Observer, October 25th, 2019
- Black Worker Humiliated After Coworkers Allegedly Call Her Natural Hair 'Unprofessional,' 'Inappropriate', and Sign Petition, Newsweek, October 1st, 2019
Photo by Clark Tibbs on Unsplash