Stories
NYC Commission on Human Rights Outlaws Hair and Hairstyle-Based Discrimination
Next Post

Press {{ keys }} + D to make this page bookmarked.

Close

NYC Commission on Human Rights Outlaws Hair and Hairstyle-Based Discrimination

4860
amny.com/PrtSc

On Monday, the New York City Human Rights Commission released new guidelines protecting New Yorkers from being discriminated due to their hair texture or style.

The guidance gives New Yorkers the right to “maintain natural hair or hairstyles that are closely associated with their racial, ethnic or cultural identities” and classifies any attempt to single people out based on their hair or hairstyle as racial discrimination.

The protections apply to everyone but were prompted largely by what the commission calls “racist stereotypes that black hairstyles are unprofessional.”

The measure, thought to be the first of its kind nationwide, was enacted to protect people who have faced anti-black racism, particularly in the form of hair-based discrimination.

“Bans or restrictions on natural hair or hairstyles associated with Black people are often rooted in white standards of appearance and perpetuate racist stereotypes that Black hairstyles are unprofessional,” the commission writes.

The report said that while an employer, for example, can require employees to dress work-appropriate, they cannot enforce any policy in a “discriminatory manner and/or target specific hair textures or hairstyles.”

“A grooming policy to maintain a ‘neat and orderly’ appearance that prohibits locs or cornrows is discriminatory against Black people because it presumes that these hairstyles, which are commonly associated with Black people, are inherently messy or disorderly,” the report says. “This type of policy is also rooted in racially discriminatory stereotypes about Black people, and racial stereotyping is unlawful discrimination under the [New York City Human Rights Law].”

Legally, employers are banned from any form of discrimination that dictates how someone wears their hair. This includes enacting inherently-racist “grooming policies” that prohibit employees from wearing their hair in “twists, locs, braids, cornrows, Afros, Bantu knots, fades or Afros” which are commonly associated with black people.

“There’s nothing keeping us from calling out these policies prohibiting natural hair or hairstyles most closely associated with black people,” Carmelyn P. Malalis, the Chair and Commissioner of the New York City Commission on Human Rights, told the NY Times, adding that “they are based on racist standards of appearance.”

Additionally, employers can’t ask their employees to chemically relax or straighten their hair, and impose “unfair conditions, or otherwise discriminating against employees based on aspects of their appearance associated with their race.”

Malalis said in a tweet on Monday that “Hair is a part of you. Race discrimination based on hair is illegal in NYC.”

As the NY Times notes, the measures came on the heels of investigations that looked into employee complaints of discrimination at several businesses across Manhattan, Queens, and the Bronx. Local hair and makeup artists say some are afraid to go to work or job interviews with their natural hair and instead alter it.

Anti-black hair-based discrimination resulting in threats, harassment, and firing has long been pervasive.

Destiny Tompkins, who formerly worked at the Banana Republic in White Plains, New York, sued the Gap, Inc. in 2017 on the grounds of discrimination. She says her manager, who was white, told her that her box braids were “unkempt” and not “Banana Republic appropriate.”

Back in December, Andrew Johnson, a student at Buena Regional High School in Buena, New Jersey, was forced by a wrestling referee to cut off his dreadlocks moments before a match, or forfeit. The incident was captured on a video that went viral, ultimately resulting in the referee’s ban from calling matches in the school district.

According to Times, individuals who violate these guidelines can face penalties in up to $250,000, with “no cap on damages.”

Author: USA Really