Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it's an extension of the college degree requirement.
It's about having a barrier that hopefully correlates with people who were raised better.
Good teeth. No tattoos. Can spell.
Those people likely aren't aspiring gas station/convenience store employees.
Appearance might be important for high end design stores or anywhere where good look is promoted. They probably are very creative finding faults when recruiting, but not those that might get them in trouble.
Our sales office has perfected this. They all look like models.
Yes, but EEOC discrimination law only applies to the protected classes, and even then only those with over 15 employees. Unless there is a stronger state law that store may not have 15 and therefore be exempt. Even then discrimination is very hard to prove even with a good attorney, unless the employer is dumb enough to say something in front of witnesses or ion writing. For example, I remember when a supervisor at a place I was working told a buxom woman she was not being hired because her breasts would get in the way of working in tight spaces. All of the interviews there were recorded, and he was fired.
This
I work for a Company with 25,000 employees. We've had law suites for firing people but not 1 for not hiring people. They hire who they want when they want.
Maybe they want people who aspire for more than that?
I want a private island in the South Pacific.
If they want nice things, they're going to have to pay for it. For $11-14/hr, that's probably not going to come easy. But by all means, best of luck to them in their search.
I don't think a company could get away with this in the UK, land of teeth with personality.
But it's a known fact, if you are prettier or more handsome, you're more likely to get hired, promoted, and paid more. And not hiring older workers is definitely a thing, so add younger looking, too.
What I don't get is all of a sudden companies are saying the first person to greet the customer and represent the company has to look "nice" now? Companies are aware of the fact that the first person a customer sees and interacts with from the company is the usually the lowest paid employee, right? Why do you think you walk into some of these places and get a yawn from the person who's supposed to help you?
If I had a company, I'd make sure the employees making the first impression on the customers were paid well and therefore hopefully enthusiastic about working before I'd worry about their teeth.
I want a private island in the South Pacific.
If they want nice things, they're going to have to pay for it.
They seem willing enough to pay for it.
Aside from the bad press due to poorly handled PR... having the clear goals is an absolutely solid idea.
No matter how much the can't spell, tatted up snaggle-tooths complain.
I went to a Sephora beauty store one time and the person helping me was wearing these white plastic "snap on?" teeth. I had to resist staring at them because they were so obviously not real. I did make a note with my peripheral vision.
I think they were those kind that kids in beauty pageants wear to make their teeth look perfect. I don't know...but bad teeth would have been better in that case.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
