Search form

New York City Releases Enforcement Guidance on Race Discrimination on Basis of Hair

By Lori D. Bauer, Richard I. Greenberg, Daniel J. Jacobs and Jonathan L. Bing
  • February 20, 2019

Legal enforcement guidance on race discrimination on the basis of hair from the New York City Commission on Human Rights affirms that employer policies on appearance and grooming that ban, limit, or otherwise restrict natural hair or hairstyles may be unlawful under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL).

The guidance states that “while grooming and appearance policies adversely impact many communities, this legal enforcement guidance focuses on policies addressing natural hair or hairstyles most commonly associated with Black people, who are frequent targets of race discrimination based on hair.”

Carmelyn P. Malalis, the Chair and Commissioner of the New York City Commission on Human Rights, noted that “[p]olicies that limit the ability to wear natural hair or hairstyles associated with Black people aren’t about ‘neatness’ or ‘professionalism;’ they are about limiting the way Black people move through workplaces, public spaces and other settings.”

While the guidance primarily focuses on race-based discrimination, it also notes that protections under the NYCHRL as they relate to hair-based discrimination extend to other areas beyond race, such as discrimination based on religion and gender, as well as ethnic or cultural identities.

For purposes of the guidance, “natural hair” is characterized as “the natural texture and/or length of hair;… hair that is untreated by chemicals or heat and can be styled with or without extensions.” Moreover, the guidance notes that protections available under the NYCHRL extend to “treated hair styled into twists, braids, cornrows, Afros, Bantu knots, fades and/or locs.” The guidance also provides for the right to keep hair in an “uncut or untrimmed states.”

Examples of potential violations of the NYCHRL by employers include:

  • Maintaining policies that ban or require the alteration of natural hair or hair styled into twists, braids, cornrows, Afros, Bantu knots, fades, or locs.
  • Applying facially neutral policies in a discriminatory manner, e.g., enforcing a grooming policy banning the use of color or patterned hairstyles against Black employees only.
  • Enacting policies that force employees to straighten, relax (using chemicals or heat), or otherwise manipulate their hair to conform to employer expectations.
  • Enacting a policy prohibiting hair that extends beyond a certain length from the scalp.
  • Harassing, imposing unfair conditions, or otherwise discriminating against employees based on aspects of their appearance associated with their race, e.g., prohibiting a Black employee with locs from being in a customer-facing role unless they change their hairstyle.

While the guidance recognizes an employer may have legitimate health or safety concerns regarding hairstyles, it states that employers must consider alternative ways to address concerns before imposing a ban or restriction on employees’ hairstyles, such as use of hair nets, hair ties, head coverings, or alternative safety equipment.

Please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney with any questions related to employment policies and other preventive practices.

©2019 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm with more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries. Having built its reputation on providing premier workplace law representation to management, the firm has grown to include leading practices in the areas of government relations, healthcare and sports law. For more information, visit www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

February 28, 2019

Portland, Oregon, Bars Discrimination Against Atheists, Agnostics

February 28, 2019

An amendment to the civil rights code of Portland, Oregon, extends protections against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations to atheists, agnostics, and other “non-believers.” Religious facilities are expressly exempt. The Portland City Code, chapter 23.01, already prohibits discrimination on the basis of... Read More

February 27, 2019

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) Is Not Subject to Equitable Tolling

February 27, 2019

In a decision important to class action practice, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), which establishes a 14-day deadline to seek permission to appeal an order granting or denying class certification, is not subject to equitable tolling. Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, No. 17-1094 (Feb. 26, 2019... Read More

February 26, 2019

New York City and State Expand Protections for Transgender, Non-Binary, Gender Non-Conforming Workers

February 26, 2019

Protections for transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming employees in New York have been given a boost. Significant changes to the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) will expand the scope of prohibited discriminatory conduct. Additionally, New York State has enacted the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA),... Read More

Related Practices