Today I am going to blog about a controversial subject: hiring hotties. Yes it is so controversial that many people don’t talk about it as in filing lawsuits against companies or organizations, yet many employers or organizations are practicing it on a daily basis, 24/7 and 365 days per year in hiring new staff or employees. I know at least ten different companies that discriminate based on “attractiveness” but I am not going to mention names here.
They tend to be young, pretty and female in tight t-shirts and short skirts or shorts, whatever the company is renowned for. The question is it illegal? I do not have a problem with beauty discrimination. Hey but wait a little! What is beauty? If we define beauty based on the facial appearance that is to say impeccable and flawless or the presence of a minute detail like a mole or scar, then that is where it is not okay and I have a problem with some employers. Beauty is truly in the eyes of the beholder right? If you take care of your body and portray a positive image or attitude about yourself, people will see you as attractive. These qualities are essential for many types of jobs.
However, has the law got a grip on employers forbidding them on the basis of “attractiveness or beauty discrimination”? If you answered yes to my question, please let me know as well. Lawsuits proceed on the fact that it is illegal to discriminate based on sex, race, religion, disability or national orientation. I think every employer discriminates in one way or the other subtly or overtly in hiring its employees.
My next controversial question is does the beauty discrimination come as a result of customer preference for a certain “look” or it’s just a marketing strategy? When can an employer prefer the unattractive, yet intelligent over the attractive and not so intelligent? These are questions that keep my mind-boggling.
What about hiring only single sex in the work place? Is this also illegal? Have you ever applied for a job opening or advertisement and the job specification goes like this “We are looking for a female between the ages of ….with high professional qualifications…Other attributes are: must be physically attractive, smile and be humble…” or have you ever come across something like this “We are an equal opportunity employer…but we prefer ladies instead”. Wherein lies the “equality” in this case? Now please don’t be quick to “crucify” me here yet. You can keep your comments for later and bring them on. In the past, when hiring women, meritocracy (candidates of equal standing or qualifications) was often applied. But these days, most companies have thrown that rule to the dogs and instead applied “the hotter the better” principle. It is now becoming a fact of life that the better looking ones would most likely get the job having a “competitive” advantage over the not so physically attractive ones. After all, doesn’t it pay to be pretty?
Could it be that companies do discriminate based on physical attractiveness to forthrightly tantalize male customers? Let’s talk about it.