The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Dress code while off work?
jungleroomx
It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered User regular
It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered User regular
My wifes employer is trying to enforce a dress code for their employees while the employee is not clocked in.
Is this even enforceable? If they decide to try and enforce it (we live in a right to work state), is there a legal precedent for this?
Is this even enforceable? If they decide to try and enforce it (we live in a right to work state), is there a legal precedent for this?
0
Posts
This probably depends on where you live, too?
wal-mart is the most famous practitioner of this; it's a shitty policy, but not illegal
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
No I mean her work dress code is business casual, and they want her dressed business casual all the damn time, work or not.
I'm still having trouble figuring out what this actually means.
Like, they want to tell her what to wear when she goes to the grocery store on Saturday morning to buy Bisquick to make pancakes?
Yes.
But the answer will really depend on the state. In Colorado, it's illegal for a company to fire someone for any lawful activity, as long as it's off work premises, and the employee is not on the clock unless it relates to a bona fide occupational requirement or is reasonably and rationally related to the employee’s employment activities and responsibilities. While that seems fairly broad, clothing would almost certainly be considered not considered bona fide in a court.
I don't actually know if there's legal precedent; everything I can pull up about conduct outside the workplace goes back to things like smoking, drinking or carrying firearms. This is such a benign issue, I can't imagine it being enforceable
I think he wants to look for "at will," not "right to work."
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Yeah that's just dumb. As others have mentioned, though, it really depends on where you live and the local labor laws. But if you're in an "at will" state, then you're basically SOL because they can fire you for literally anything so long as it isn't discriminatory in nature. For example, if your wife says the word "tomato" as "tomahto" and her boss hates it, they can fire her for it. Practically speaking, it really doesn't seem worth raising a ruckus over unless they are actually following their employees around and making sure that the dress code is being followed at all times. It seems pretty stupid in general, but if you work at a place that's going to fire you for that, then I really doubt it's the kind of place you'd want to work at for very long anyway...
Actually makes it worse, from a legal standpoint. IANAL and all but dress is probably a form of speech and while on the clock the government can compel you to say things appropriate for your job (dress this way) that's not the case off the clock and would violate the 1st.
With the Right to Work thing though there aren't many options. One plan, with more risk than zero, is to ignore it and hope they're stupid enough to document the first offense in writing (/don't fire for a first offense, even if it's flagrant). Even then if they do eventually terminate her it's going to be a fight to try and straighten it out so I can definitely see it not being worth it.
I'm having a pretty difficult time believing there is state government policy requiring enforcement of dress code while not on duty. What state is this?
Oklahoma.
And it's not a statewide thing. It's a new VP in the department her company contracts for trying to "leave his mark" on that particular department.
No? I think you're getting right to work mixed up with at will, too.
Right to work: Joining a union, or paying union dues, can't be a requisite for a job position
At will: An employer can dismiss employees for any reason not covered by law, without warning
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation disagrees.
I mean, I agree with you. But see, if it's not "right to work" it's considered "mantadory unionism". Yeah, I know.
I don't think you're reading my post correctly. There are two sets of laws, and people often get them confused, including in this thread.
Right to work laws have to do with unions. In right to work states, a job can't require you to be part of a union, nor to pay union fees; employees have a right to work regardless of their union status. This thread has nothing to do with right to work, no one's talking about the union.
At-will employment means an employer can fire an employee for any reason. There are no at-will states -- basically everywhere is at-will -- but states have their own exceptions. Federal anti-discrimination laws are always in force. In most states (but not all) employers can't fire employees for following the law, and some states require just cause (so not entirely at-will anymore). The dress code outside work is an at-will issue, since you're basically asking, can the employer make up a totally ridiculous rule and dismiss my wife if she doesn't follow it? And the answer is probably yes.
The two don't have anything do with each other, they aren't two sides of the same coin. If you conflate right to work with at-will, the term makes no sense because at-will has to do with the right of the employer to fire people, not the right of the employee to get a job.
I don't know if the First Amendment argument would have any legs unless the employee was infracted for clothes that were religious in nature or making an obvious statement. But on the face of it it seems wildly unrealistic unless there are a lot of unmentioned exceptions. No one's going to go to the beach, work out at the gym or mow the lawn in business casual. It sounds like something that HR would walk back or "clarify" inside of a week.
No idea. I would assume since this guy claims they are 24/7 representatives of the company she would until swimming.
Unless they're paying her for 24/7 and it's written into a contract she signed to such effect - tough shit.
You could sift through this site, or call Legal Aid directly.
http://oklaw.org/issues/work/employee-rights-1
You could also try calling the Dept of Labor
https://www.ok.gov/odol/Contact_Information/
To my wife's credit she's already contacted a lawyer friend just to see what possible actions could be taken. In her words, "They can give me a clothing allowance or they can fuck off."
I'm not saying you shouldn't do the right thing here, but just be sure you're going into this with your eyes wide open, and that this is the cause you want to be going out of your way to fight.
Like a dog marking its territory?
Screw that guy, that department, and that company. Your wife should start looking for a new job while she wears whatever she pleases on her off time.
Nah, the proper response is to agree, but triple+ your rate for the 24 hour dress code need. Either they back down or you get paid triple!
It's not unheard of for some executive to make crazy demands, but this just sounds like a mix of two different useless work phrases: "You are always a representative of the company" and "When working we should always be presentable" (or something similar)
Steam: CavilatRest
Oh no, it's pretty clear. Apparently her company is protesting it as of today.
This is part of the legal problem with this, because if they enforce it they are essentially either performing surveillance (formal or informal) upon their employees or taking heresay from snitch-like reports as grounds for termination. Neither of which are legal in most states without having signed something complying to it, and even if you had are questionable in legal grounding.
IANAL, but this is certainly something her company should be recruiting a legal team for.
Then their new "mark" is going to be where that lawyer goes up one side of them and then down the other.