I’m not surprised that this story has caught the attention of you and your clients. Sexist dress codes have been making headlines since Nicola Thorp, an agency worker, was sent home from work because she refused to wear high heels as required by her employer. She started a petition to outlaw employers requiring female staff to wear high heels at work.
The petition received over 150,000 signatures and led the Petitions and Women and Equalities Committees to carry out an inquiry in to discriminatory dress codes. The inquiry heard evidence from women who were told by employers to chemically straighten their hair, wear high heels, dye their hair blonde, wear revealing clothing and frequently re-apply makeup.
The joint report called for the government to review the law and make it more effective. They also recommended carrying out an employer awareness campaign and increasing financial penalties available to tribunals to properly penalise employers who break the law.
Dress codes which treat one gender less favourably than the other are illegal under the Equality Act 2010. Your client cannot lawfully have a dress code which requires females to wear high heels as this subjects them to a different standard than men and is less favourable treatment. There are also disability discrimination issues that arise from this because women with medical conditions that make it painful to wear high heels during the working day will be unfavourably treated by this requirement.
Your client can have a dress code which applies equally to men and women and applies an equal standard of dress. For example, requiring men to wear collar and ties is not less favourable treatment where women also have to wear smart office clothes because this applies the same standard of “office smart” to both genders. There may also be different requirements that are allowed under the law because of health and safety standards or if there is a sound business reason which justifies the difference.
This is not the last you will hear about this issue; Thorp’s petition will be debated in Parliament at the beginning of March and is likely to make headlines again.
