Requiring Male Employees to Wear a Collar and Tie - Is this Discrimination?

In a widely publicised employment tribunal claim, last year, a Jobcentre employee was found to have been discriminated against by his employer on the grounds of sex, as he was required to wear a collar and tie to work.

The Tribunal held that women had a greater choice of dress than men and they were not required to wear any specific item of clothing, therefore the male employee had been treated less favourably due to his sex.

If this ruling had been allowed to stand it would have had a resounding impact on the dress code requirement of all employers and the 7,000 claims lodged by employees in the same situation would have succeeded!

However:

• The Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) has recently overruled this decision.
• The EAT stated that the question that should have been asked was whether the level of smartness required by the employer could have been achieved without men having to wear a collar and tie.
• If an appropriate level of smartness could have been achieved without the need to wear a collar and tie, then the lack of flexibility in the employers dress code would suggest that the employee had been discriminated against.
• The Tribunal did not make any findings to ask or answer this question and therefore the case has been sent back to a different tribunal to examine this issue.

What action should employers take?

Whilst the revised decision will hopefully clarify this issue, employers should be aware of the EAT reasoning and ensure that they are not expecting men to achieve a higher level of smartness than women by requiring men to wear a collar and tie.

Carol Shaw
Partner

20 November 2003