•
•

Legality of calling prosthetic limbs unprofessional or prohibiting an employee from "showing" a prosthetic or it's outline under the dress code? (Virgina) (self.legaladvice)

legal_throwaway_803 が 投稿

I have a question about if the following is legal to put in a dress code for a company that does office based work (so no safety concerns because it's not a warehouse or factory):

No employee shall be permitted to have any prosthetic limbs visible. Said employee's must wear closed shoes and pants with a wide leg so as not to render a prosthetic limb or its outline visible (no skirts are permitted). In the case of a prosthetic arm or hand, employees shall ensure that their sleeves are long enough and wide enough so as not to show the prosthesis or its outline. Any visible prosthetic or outline will be condsidered as unprofessional dress and will result in dicipline up to and including dismissal, without a warning being required.

Someone has worked there for 18 months and wears skirts every day. She has a prosthetic leg. The new company president authroized this addition to the dress code and the board is aware. Would it be legal for the company to fire her if she wore a skirt tomorrow and her prosthetic leg was showing? This occurred in the state of Virginia.

EDIT: Apologies if the formatting is weird or if this posts more than once. I'm on mobile and my connection is spotty right now)

全 28 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]ZanctmaoQuality Contributor 41ポイント42ポイント  (8子コメント)

Yeah, no. This is a hall of fame level stupid decision. Plaintiff's attorneys would line up around the block for the opportunity to represent this woman. If this business relied in any way on working with the public their reputation would go up in smoke, and they'd be subject to discipline by the EEOC.

Essentially this policy is: "People with disabilities, specifically disabilities that are associated with recent military service, are icky and we don't want to see them. We'd also like our black employees to wear a lot of caked on white makeup if possible so they look less black."

[–]legal_throwaway_803[S] 20ポイント21ポイント  (7子コメント)

Funny you should say that because the prosthetic (leg below the knee) is the result of military service and the new owner and president say that it makes them uncomfortable.

[–]catladygoals 16ポイント17ポイント  (1子コメント)

UNBELIEVABLE. Even if someone felt this way (which...?) I can't fathom that they would be so stupid to say it out loud.

[–]RealPutin 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

This may have been the stupidest employer to come through this sub. Disabled and a veteran? In Virginia? Even if legal, that's asking to go out of business.

[–]ZanctmaoQuality Contributor 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

So they'd get veterans groups protesting them as well. That's a "winning" strategy for sure. The new boss and owner need to drop $2k in a consult with an employment lawyer. When he stops laughing, he'll tell them in no uncertain terms that this is folly of the highest order. Then the lawyer will gleefully tell his staff about the company that just came to him because they will be the source of a ton of business.

[–]wiredinmycoffee 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

is the result of military service

the new owners are really playing with fire here, people would be very very upset if this information got out

this policy is directed at one person with a prosthetic leg, and i would thing a lawyer would be pretty excited about getting a case like this

[–]pipsdontsqueak 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh man. I know a couple attorneys that would love this lawsuit.

[–]pm-me-neckbeards 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

the new owner and president say that it makes them uncomfortable.

Would they also ask someoene with a facial deformity to wear a paper bag over their head?

[–]BUBBLYSTRING 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

the new owner and president say that it makes them uncomfortable.

I'm stuck on 'it makes them uncomfortable?'

[–]JadieRose 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

I commented on the first post as well - this is definitely illegal. I cannot believe an employer would be this dumb as to put something like this in writing.

[–]legal_throwaway_803[S] 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

Apologies for that. For some reason it posted 3 times I deleted two of them when I noticed.

[–]migrainevision 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

NAL but I wrote my PhD dissertation on corporate policy and discrimination. You'd be amazed what dumb ass policies are dreamed up by people who have no idea what they're doing. This is a dream case and if we're lucky enough your employer will be so stupid they'll let it go to court and they'll get to be featured in someone else's dissertation.

[–]CowOrker01 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cmon, don't leave us hanging. Give us some examples of bad policies!

[–]Draqur 9ポイント10ポイント  (2子コメント)

Is there some reason for this? Is she being rude somehow involving her prosthetic leg? Did this new rule come out of no where?

Was she detaching it and beating people with it? Was she storing food in it, and it was getting moldy? Perhaps housing a family of squirrels? Does it make cool (potentially annoying to non-fun people) noises like transformer robots?

This is such an absurd rule to be created out of the blue, there must be some backstory to it.

[–]legal_throwaway_803[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

A new owner has purchased the company and the president retired and a new one is hired. They say it makes them uncomfortable. That's the only issue. This person wears skirts every day.

[–]megabyte1 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is truly just terrible. You're a good friend for pursuing this.

[–]RealPutin 13ポイント14ポイント  (6子コメント)

NAL, If that dress code applied to everybody and covered all limbs, then the employer would be good to go.

Specifically for someone with prosthetic limbs? That's messed up and quite discriminatory. EEOC would love to see this.

I'll go law hunting to see if I can find something, actual lawyers please correct me

[–]legal_throwaway_803[S] 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

Only for people with prothestic limbs. The rest of the dress code says that skirts and dresses may be worn so long as they are just above the knee, short sleeved collared shirts may be worn with a tie as well as sleeveless blouses and dresses, as long as in all cases a jacket is on hand for meetings with clients.

[–]JadieRose 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd love to see them try to defend this if there's no safety-related reason for them to target a specific, legally protected, segment of the workforce with this policy. And "eww gross!" isn't a defense.

[–]RealPutin 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah not ok. Uniform dress code required. Only exceptions are when the disabled individual cannot physically wear the uniform.

[–]_jackflack 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Aren't you allowed to modify a dress code so people with tattoo's are barred from displaying them? Assuming it applies to all employee's. I would assume this to be similar to that vs. EEOC violation.

[–]RealPutin 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah. But tattooed isn't a protected class.

[–]_jackflack 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cool, I get that. Thanks :)

[–]we_got_caught 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

NAL but sounds discriminatory toward people with prosthetics.

[–]wintremute 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm going to assume that no one in HR has had any input on this? Because it's nuclear waste level toxic. They're singling out and actively discriminating against a disabled combat veteran for being disabled. I'd bet there are some powerful politicians that represent her that would be quite interested to know about this. She should drop a dime or two.

[–]andpassword 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You know you're in for a laugh when they pluralize "employees" with an apostrophe.

[–]Grimsterr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

So is she raffling off who gets to represent her? Lawyers would be willing to put HER on retainer just to get their hands on this juicy peach of a case.

This is the very textbook (not that I've ever read a law textbook) of why the EEOC exists and is so illegal.