MENU

Tag: breaking news

Discrimination Based on Hair?: The CROWN Act 

July 5, 2022

Crown Act passes US House of Representatives

On March 18, 2022, the US house of representatives passed the CROWN ACT banning “discrimination based on an individual’s texture or style of hair.” The bill, first introduced to the house in 2021 by Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman, was passed in a vote of 235-189. It currently is being read in the US Senate.

While this is the first time the bill is getting approval at the federal level, it has already made its way into state legislation across several states in the US. In 2019, California became the first state to pass the CROWN ACT into law by a unanimous vote. Twelve other states, including New York, Washington, Nebraska, Delaware, Oregon, and Colorado, would eventually follow suit between 2019 and 2021. Here in Georgia, the CROWN ACT is not yet law.

What Is the Crown Act as Relates to Discrimination Based on Hair?

The CROWN ACT stands for Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair. According to the bill, “Routinely, people of African descent are deprived of educational and employment opportunities because they are adorned with natural or protective hairstyles in which hair is tightly coiled or tightly curled, or worn in locks, cornrows, twists, braids, Bantu knots, or Afros.”

Black people have often faced racial discrimination across corporate America because of how they groom their natural hair. According to one study, employers perceive black women with natural hairstyles as less competent and professional (and less likely to be recommended for job interviews) than black or white women with straight hairstyles. In 2016, Sabrina Chiodo, assistant manager at Jack Astor’s Bar and Grill, sent home 20-year old Akua Agyemfra for wearing her hair in a bun (contrary to restaurant policy that all female staff wear their hair down). Elsewhere, in Louisiana, Imani Jackson lost her job at American Screening LLC within a month of wearing her natural hair in a bun instead of the wig she had worn during her interview and her first month working at the company. But it’s not only African-American women that suffer from racial discrimination because of their hair. In 2018, Andrew Johnson, a black high school wrestler, was told by a referee to cut his dreadlocks or forfeit a wrestling match. It is cases like these that the CROWN ACT seeks to address and outlaw. 

What Are the Effects of the CROWN ACT on Discrimination?

The CROWN ACT prohibits racial discrimination based on a person’s hair. This discrimination is often unspoken in US workplaces but ladened in employee handbooks that specify company policy. As such, the CROWN ACT would be a significant step to enabling a more diversified and inclusive corporate America. In the wake of the CROWN ACT, more companies will adopt new policies that allow women of color to groom their natural hair the way they deem fit without discrimination. Also, before the CROWN ACT, cases of race-based hair discrimination that have made it to US courts have failed to yield substantial results. For instance, in 2014, US District Court Judge Charles R. Butler Jr dismissed a race-based hair discrimination case involving Chastity Jones and Catastrophe Management Systems.  In 2016, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court’s decision and further attempts to get the US Supreme Court to intervene failed to yield results. 

However, if the US Senate passes the CROWN ACT into law, it would provide the necessary legal protection for victims of race-based hair discrimination, especially since there’s currently no other federal legislation in the US that protects people of color from stigmatization because of their hair. 

Furthermore, since its inception in California in 2019, the CROWN ACT has created awareness and kick-started healthy conversations about racial discrimination based on a person’s hair. These conversations will only become more mainstream once the bill becomes federal law. 

Conclusion

Workplace discrimination based on hair is more common than we realize for people of color. The stigma behind natural hair for black people has often deprived them of educational and employment opportunities. However, the narrative should change once the CROWN ACT becomes federal law. If you’re a black person in the US facing race-based hair discrimination at your workplace or school, hiring legal help is the best course of action to protect your rights.

Or, if you are an employer seeking to create an inclusive dress policy or dress code with specifications about hair, contact us.If you want to review your company’s policy surrounding natural hair in the wake of the CROWN ACT, our expert team of lawyers can also assist you throughout the process and ensure there are no grey areas that could get you into a potential lawsuit.

At the Law Office of Sheri Oluyemi, we have the best legal hands in US employment law to handle workplace discrimination. Reach out to us today; let’s look at your case and begin proceedings to get you justice.

DOL Revisions to FFCRA Regulations: What You Need to Know

September 25, 2020

The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) Regulations were promulgated by the US Department of Labor to implement the FFRCA. Our Employment Law Blawg summary of the FFCRA is here. In response to a ruling from the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York, the initial regulations effective on April 1, 2020 were replaced effective, September 16, 2020. Here’s what you need to know about the revisions.

Changes to the regs were deemed necessary to improve the process of taking and requesting paid leave, including the availability of leave and related terms. The DOL aimed to achieve consistency and clarity throughout the regs, and in that vein, the new revisions were outlined to provide the following:

  • Reaffirmation that employees can only take FFCRA leave if and when work is available to them. That is, if someone is on a work reduction layoff, they cannot claim FFCRA leave because there is no work available at the moment.

  • Reaffirmation that employer approval is required for all intermittent leave taken under FFCRA. Failure to seek employer approval will result in denial of FFCRA leave benefits.

  • Clarification that supporting documentation should be provided as soon as possible. Employees must do their due diligence to provide employers with paperwork substantiating their eligibility for leave as quickly as they can when requesting FFCRA leave.

  • Correction of inconsistencies on the circumstances in which employees are required to notify or request permission from employers for FFCRA leave, or any leave related to expanded family and medical needs.

  • Revision of the definition of the term “health care provider”to be defined as “only employees who meet the definition of that term under the Family and Medical Leave Act regulations or who are employed to provide diagnostic services, preventative services, treatment services or other services that are integrated with and necessary to the provision of patient care which, if not provided, would adversely impact patient care.”

In sum, the newly revised FFCRA regs now defines the parameters for which employees have to request leave, or whether they can take leave without substantiated requests. It also clarifies some of the definitions outlined in the previous publication and it corrects inconsistencies to provide clearer guidelines for employers to follow when handling employee leave related to the coronavirus pandemic.

As the world has begun to reopen and the economy to rebound, employment laws must keep pace. However, it is a constant battle of finding balance, so future updates are to be expected as things continue to evolve.

Currently, employers and employees alike need concise, clear policies manage the public health crisis’ impact on their day-to-day operations, including staffing. The new regs are a good place to start with developing those policies for your organization today.