kelly was hired as a broker by lone star mutual, an established conservative stock brokerage firm located in dowtown dallas. during her job interview, kelly was a model of conservation, wearing little makeup and a navy business suit. her degree in fianance from the darden schoool at virgina and prior work experience were rated as excellent according to the interview, kelly appeared to be the perfect fit for the job. she was given a job offer on the spot. Four working days later, kelly arrived at work in designer jeans and a tight fitting velour halter top with a texas a&m logo on it. it was immeditately obvious to everyone that she was wearing nothing underneath the top. her immediate supervisor, greg, told kelly to go home immeditaly and change into something more appropriate. he further informed her that all lone star employees were expected to wear appropriate business attire while at work, as stated in the employee handbook. Kelly refused gregs request, claiming this rule restricted her right to equal protection under the law and feminine self expression. based on this refusal, greg promptly fired kelly. kelly immediately filed an EEO complaint claiming sex discrimination. a. under what circumstances would kelly win her case? b. under what circumstances would she lose her case?

Kelly would win the case in a situation where the company hasn’t briefed her on the employee codes and policies to be followed in advance. And when it comes to violations, it is necessary to address the issue in writing than a conversation. Here it,s an example of an undocumented issue which is liable for litigations. A thorough investigation and documented views of co workers is required before firing. These are some of the points that are in favor of Kelly to win the case.

Kelly would lose her case if the management team had briefed her about the company policies, and if there is a clause in the policy, stating that inappropriate attire could lead to dismissal. The other case scenario would be one where the policy of “sexual discrimination and employment policies” state that the employment policies cannot be termed illegal, if it doesn’t adversely affect the employment of people of certain sex and is necessary for the operation of business. Considering the clause Kelly would definitely loose the case as business attire is the norm in a stock broking firm.

Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.