Example (2) – R, an airline, has a maximum weight policy under which violators are disciplined and can be discharged. The weight policy applies only to passenger service representatives and stewardesses who are all female. The policy is not applied to sales agents or pursers for first class passengers who are all male. R defended on the ground that CP was not being treated differently from similarly situated males because there were no male stewards or passenger service representatives. Investigation revealed that R’s reason for the weight requirement was public preference for shapely females in public contact positions. Even though the job categories are different in this case, since the jobs are public contact jobs and R is concerned with public preference in such jobs, the males and females are similarly situated. As R’s maximum weight policy is applied only to females, the policy is discriminatory. (Where other than public contact positions are involved, the issue is non-CDP, and the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted.)
A tougher state involves the imposition of different limit pounds compared so you can top standards for men and you can female of exact same top. In place of lowest top requirements in which setting additional requirements is known to result in discrimination (see § 621.2 over), specific process of law (find cases cited less than) discovered one form some other limit weight criteria for males and you may females of the identical peak doesn’t end in banned discrimination. In fact, the charts that are important, and you can being made use of to establish peak/weight compared in order to human anatomy proportions contain some other permissible restrictions to possess men from inside the detection of the mental differences when considering the one or two teams. A good 5’7″ boy of average stature would thus be allowed to weigh proportionally more than a good 5’7″ woman regarding medium prominence on the same top/lbs graph. The real difference into the pounds compared to level regarding a 5’7″ woman regarding large stature would obviously end up being faster.
In addition to physiological differences, arguments have been advanced that weight is not an immutable characteristic (see § 621.5(a)) and that policies based on personal appearance (see § 619, Grooming Standards) do not result in prohibited sex discrimination. (See Jarrell and Gerdom which are cited below.) Therefore, these courts have concluded that, as long as the different height/weight standards are not unreasonable in terms of medical considerations and ability to comply, are consistent with accepted medical notions of good health, and exemptions are available for those medically unable to comply, the use of different standards does not result in prohibited discrimination.
This issue need are nevertheless non-CDP. Any office away from Legal counsel, Advice Office is to hence be contacted for assistance whenever charge depending about procedure develop.
(e) Percentage Decisions
Inside the Fee Decision No. 70-140, CCH EEOC Conclusion (1973) ¶ 6067, and this so-called disparate cures, reliance on an insurance plan up against hiring overweight candidates try receive to be good pretext to possess racial discrimination given that simply Black individuals were declined to be obese.
CP, a lady stewardess who was self-disciplined to be heavy, submitted a charge alleging one to she was being discriminated facing due to the fact off this lady sex in this men just weren’t subject to new plan
In the Commission Choice Zero. 76-47, CCH A job Practices Publication ¶ 6635, in which negative feeling try alleged, this new Payment concluded that fitness singles nazwa uЕјytkownika absent evidence one Blacks due to the fact a course, according to a basic peak/lbs chart, proportionally weighing more than other individuals there isn’t any reason for concluding your respondent’s inability to hire Black individuals whom go beyond maximum lbs limitation constitutes battle discrimination.
Within the Payment Choice Zero. 76-forty five, CCH Work Methods Book ¶ 6634, in which negative impression has also been alleged, the Commission found that absent analytical research one Hispanics while the a group consider proportionally more than people of almost every other federal origins, Title VII isn’t broken from the good respondent’s incapacity to engage Hispanics just who surpass the utmost pounds restriction.