An employer may bar an employee from wearing facial jewelry even when the practice is an expression of religious faith, according to the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The court determined in a recent case that enforcement of a dress code prohibiting facial jewelry does not violate Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 if the employer believes the jewelry will damage the employer’s public image. However, the employer must offer a reasonable accommodation before taking any action against the employee.
An employer that does not offer a reasonable accommodation could be liable to the employee.
This ruling specifically concerned a member of the Church of Body Modification, a Web-based religious organization. But it could have an impact on more traditional religious practices, particularly if the employee agrees to accept a reasonable compromise or accommodation.
In the case of the pierced employee, she wanted a general exemption from the employer’s dress code policy. She did not accept an accommodation allowing her to replace her facial jewelry with clear plastic spacers. The court found that her stance placed an undue hardship on the employer.
On the other hand, an employer that does not offer a reasonable accommodation could be liable to the employee. For example, veils could be prohibited for security or safety reasons. But employers should not prohibit items of clothing just because the employers are unfamiliar with certain religious practices.
The following steps may help if you face a similar situation:
- Find out if the employee can suggest reasonable accommodations.
- Ask if a general practice has worked for the employee – or for friends or family – at other workplaces.
- Agree to the idea of some type of accommodation. Don’t start a power struggle.
- Document your accommodation efforts.
Reasonableness is crucial – for the employer and the employee. The pierced employee lost her case because she refused a reasonable compromise.
