Reference no: EM132253336

Case: Employer Liable for “Appearance” Actions

A ruling by the California Supreme Court held that L’Oreal USA, a large cosmetics company, was liable for ordering a supervisor to terminate a female employee. The details of the case are described next.

Elysa Yanowitz was a regional sales manager for L’Oreal USA in California when her boss ordered her to fire a sales associate with a strong performance record because the employee was not attractive enough. The boss said she “wasn’t good looking enough” and that in her place should be hired someone who was “hot.” Yanowitz refused, contending that the boss’s order was discrimination because male sales associates did not have to be attractive. She repeatedly refused to fi re the female employee and said that the company retaliated against her. Ultimately, Yanowitz left the company on a disability leave due to stress.

The court ruling addressed protection for those who refuse orders that they believe are discriminatory. The court also stated that an appearance standard applied to one gender but not the other is sexual discrimination. Yanowitz left the company after retaliation but won the case after the court held that her whistle-blowing was protected.

1) Do you agree that the company was guilty of illegal actions? Why or why not?

2) Discuss some examples when appearance can be a legitimate work issue.