Selective Enforcement of Employee Hair Policy Gives Rise to Plausible Gender Discrimination Claims

In Viscecchia v. Alrose Allegria LLC, No. 14-CV-6064 JFB SIL, 2015 WL 4602729 (E.D.N.Y. July 30, 2015), plaintiff asserted claims of gender discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law.

Specifically, the defendant fired plaintiff – a line cook – after he failed to comply with defendant’s warning to cut his long hair.

In granting and denying defendant’s motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the court explained:

[I]n the employment context, it is well settled that an employer does not violate Title VII or the NYHRL by requiring short hair on men, but not on women, as part of an overall grooming policy. Thus, to the extent that plaintiff contends that the portion of defendant’s policy requiring only male employees to have short hair is inherently discriminatory, that claim must be dismissed as a matter of law. However, plaintiff also claims that defendant selectively enforced the overall hair policy only against men, while permitting women to violate the hair policy in other ways, such as by having streaked hair, without any disciplinary sanctions. Those selective enforcement allegations state a plausible claim of discrimination based upon gender in violation of Title VII and the NYHRL.

Share This: