Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 28 SEPTEMBER 2016

Employer Wins Dreadlocks Deadlock

A federal appeals court recently ruled that a woman rejected from a job because she refused to cut her dreadlocks could not proceed with a race discrimination claim against the employer.

United StatesEmployment and HR

A federal appeals court recently ruled that a woman rejected from a job because she refused to cut her dreadlocks could not proceed with a race discrimination claim against the employer. The decision highlights the distinction between individual expression and inherently racial characteristics in the context of race discrimination claims under Title VII.

Here are three things you need to know about the September 15, 2016 decision in EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions.

1. Title VII Does Not Cover Individual Expression

The facts of the case are fairly straightforward. Chastity Jones applied for a customer service position with Catastrophe Management Solutions (CMS), a Mobile, Alabama claims processing company. Jones, who is black, was initially told that she had been hired pending standard background tests.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from