- checking login information
The Women's Rights Cause
395,912 people care about Women's Rights
Loading...Wear Makeup or Leave, Harrods Tells Employee
For refusing to wear makeup, 24-year-old Melanie Stark, says she was “driven out” of her job as a sales assistant at the luxury Harrods department store in Britain. Stark had worked in the HMV department of Harrods for four years without wearing makeup; indeed, she had, says the Guardian, not worn makeup during her interview and had been rated as one of the best employees by her manager. But following a “floor walk” by senior managers last August, she was sent home for not wearing makeup.
Stark first worked part-time at Harrods for three years; after earning a masters in philosophy, religion and ethics from King’s College London, she worked full-time. She has legal grounds to sue Harrods under the Equality Act 2010, says Lawrence Davies, director of Equal Justice solicitors:
“On the facts, she performed her role well for five years without makeup, so it is clearly not a valid prerequisite for her role.”
Of the dress code, he said “custom and practice would suggest that her contract has changed over the years to allow her to not wear makeup”.
Stark said she had been given a copy of the Harrods dress code at her interview, and that the store had not sought to enforce it until that “shop walk” in August. The day after that, she was sent to work in a stockroom. Stark’s floor manager then told her she had the choice of wearing makeup or leaving, but she was at first able to return to work until June of this year, when a new floor manager informed staff that she had to be “made up.” Stark was transferred to another store but decided to resign as she felt it was “time to move on.”
The dress code for female employees of Harrods is, to put it lightly, quite exacting:
The two-page “ladies” dress code stipulates: “Full makeup at all time: base, blusher, full eyes (not too heavy), lipstick, lip liner and gloss are worn at all time and maintained discreetly (please take into account the store display lighting which has a ‘washing out’ effect).”
When Stark refused to follow this, she was told she could “see what you look like with makeup” at a workshop. Says Stark:
“I was appalled. It was insulting. Basically, it was implying it would be an improvement. I don’t understand how they think it is OK to say that.”, she said.
I know what I look like with makeup. I have used it, though never at work. But I just could not see how, in this day and age, Harrods could take away my right to choose whether to wear it or not.”
Stark had complied with all other aspects of the dress code. “But it’s not like wearing black trousers, or a black shirt. This is my face.
“Make up can change your features completely, especially if I was to wear all of what they were asking. I would look like a different person to me. And I never chose to look like that.”
The dress code for male employees is quite barebones, notes the Guardian:
Slick, sophisticated and debonair”, male staff must apply deodorant, trim fingernails, avoid visible tattoos and refrain from growing mutton chops.
Mocking aside, the Harrods code is deeply sexist. It implies that a woman, however clean and presentable, can pass muster only in heavy makeup, and that anyone opting out is by default shabby and below par. The only sensible course of action, with both the Harrods mandate and its sales’ staff’s faces, is to take it all off and start again.
Debating about the dress code, and the insistence of female employees wearing makeup, at a department store might seem trivial. But it’s appalling to read about the store’s attempts to dictate and control the appearance of its workers — especially after tacitly allowing Stark to go without makeup for quite a few years — and the punishment meted out to those who don’t “look right.” Clearly Harrods has a long way to go before grasping the basic truth of “beauty in the eye of the beholder” and, until it does, it’s got a big clod of mud in its eye.
Related Care2 Coverage
Dating Site Kicks Out 30,000 Members for Being “Ugly”
Success! Psychology Today Apologizes For Kanazawa’s Racist and Sexist Article
Women More Likely to Buy Clothes When Models Look Like Them
Photo by Ambernectar 13
Read more: beauty, discrimination, employee, fired, harrods, job, makeup, womens-rights, workers rights
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
Recent Comments from Causes
Gladly voted.
That was a sad story i bet he thinks he is big mighty hunter, I like it if he was punished to the full…
Awesome news, thanks for sharing.
meet our writers
126 comments
+ add your ownI think that if she objected to the dress code, she shouldn't have taken the job. Of course it's also their fault for tacitly allowing it. I find it very logical that a store selling, among other things, clothes, makeup, luxury items etc... would like to have vendors who look glamorous. And it is a fact that makeup makes you look your best, and glamorous. I personally don't wear makeup in my daily life, only if I have to go out somewhere, because I want to save my skin, but I have to at work (it's a dance school). Luckily they don't insist on foundation, so it's basically just blusher, eyes and lips.
I know it's considering women for their looks, but hey, the capable and the non-capable both have to look their best, so it's not discriminating. I'm over 40 and fat, so they did take into account my expertise, but still it's not bad to want me to look as good as possible, it puts the customer in a better mood to see beautiful things. In the same way as we burn essential oils and have soothing colours on the walls, and we are instructed to be helpful and smiling and always greet students who come, no matter how busy we are at the computer. Things like that which all contribute to the look and feel of the place.
The look of Harrods is of beauty and luxury, like being in a consumer paradise. So it makes sense that they want everyone to look wonderful. And I know VERY FEW women over 18 who look better with no makeup. How is implying that it would be an improvement "insulting"? O
Obviously, Harrod's is 'selling' it's female employees. Some banks require women to wear high heels. It's all to sell the appearance of the female employees to increase business. Women who agree to this should get extra pay, for 'advertising' and Harrods should allow expense account and professional make-up appliers, as in movie productions.
It's all, of course, hogwash.
Noted...with amazement!
One more store I'll never, ever shop in!
Personally I think when you work in such a place you should wear make-up...mostly because it is in her contract. But I also think the management was wrong, because since she has worked so many years without it....it is their fault for not noticing earlier...
This is sooo wrong and sexist. It's infuriating.
The manager needs serious training in employer employee relations. But hey I have seen many men would could do with make-up skills. Is this in their "dress code"---- take them to the cleaners------------------just to prove a point--------------sexist creeps
That is RIDICULOUSLY stupid. They should apologize to her. She's very brave.
What a ridiculous stipulation! But, if you're going to have rules, ridiculous as they are, at least consistently enforce them.
It's their company and they can have any policies they want. I don't agree with this one, but they aren't alone in making their employees portray the image that they want to project to their customers. It is unbalanced for the men and the women, but it sounds like they want the pretty girls out on the floor.
login to add your comment
use your care2 login
add your comment
20