women lose jobs after protesting new dress code

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
arf
Offline
Joined: 25-11-06
Aug 24 2007 21:28
women lose jobs after protesting new dress code

thought this was interesting. some coffee place somewhere decided to go hooters style. some other coffee shop boss thought this was a wicked idea and told his staff they were gonna do it too. the women he employed werent too impressed so each and every one of them left the job in protest hoping they would force him to reevaluate. instead he advertised their jobs and says the response has been overwhelming - ie there are plenty more women desperate enough for work theyll sell coffee dressed in negligees or whatever.

http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_082307WAB_monroe_latte_dress_TP.63094d58.html

admin - libcommunity > news

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Aug 24 2007 22:16

quit jobs in protest might be a more accurate title, my privacy thing is blocking the page right now for some reason. I'll have a proper read later,

arf
Offline
Joined: 25-11-06
Aug 25 2007 09:29

well they were trying to force the manager to drop the new dress code, they didnt want to lose their jobs permanently. it was a bad tactic for sure but i dont know what else was open to them.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Aug 25 2007 10:24

I think striking would have been better than quitting.
I supose with resignations they get their notice period paid and with a strike it's possible that they could be fired immediately, although I would have thought introducing a compulsory new uniform/dress code would have been against their existing employment contracts.

arf
Offline
Joined: 25-11-06
Aug 25 2007 10:41

i get the impression a lot of baristas wages comes through tips. some of their customers seem to be saying theyll follow them rather than keep using the same place but the owner doesnt seem to think thats much of a loss as compared to the new custom they expect from the new uniform rules.

compete
Offline
Joined: 7-07-07
Aug 25 2007 10:54

Whilst legal action is no substitute for collective action, don't they have sex discrimination laws in the States?

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Aug 25 2007 10:57
compete wrote:
Whilst legal action is no substitute for collective action, don't they have sex discrimination laws in the States?

I suppose the employer could argue that it's not sexual discrimination, a number of his (all female) staff have quit and he's hiring new, all female staff at the same rate of pay. He's obviously a prick, but there's no law against that, sadly.

Does anybody know if there are constructive dismissal laws in America?

David in Atlanta
Offline
Joined: 21-04-06
Aug 25 2007 13:47

The Unted States has a charming legal doctrine called Employment at Will.
I doubt that aside from basics like wages and hours any enforceable contract existed and while sexual discrimination is illegal in the US it mostly covers wage equality and harrasement, nether of which seem to apply in this case. In other words the bastard seems to be within the law.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Aug 25 2007 13:50
Quote:
In other words the bastard seems to be within the law.

Ha ha. You think the boss is being “mean”? Ho ho. He/she's not a charity you know.

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Aug 25 2007 19:24

'Lush' (the 'ethical' chain of nice-smelling soap shops) recently had a day where all staff had to wear nothing but aprons, not even allowed pants, swimming costumes or anything. My friend works for them and she was really worried (they'd given her loads of other shit as well and thought refusing to do this might be the last straw that got her sacked, and they were taking it all really seriously, threatening people who wouldn't do it etc). Apparently the aprons were so small they would barely cover most womens' nipples ( that's if they stood still), and obviously revealed rather a lot of anyone who bent over. Luckily for her she happened not to be on shift the day they did it in the end, but heard that by the afternoon (once word had got around, i suppose), the shop just became full of people who'd come to perv. This was done in all Lush shops in Britain I think.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Aug 25 2007 19:42

There's a topless donut shop in Maine.

Refused's picture
Refused
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Aug 25 2007 19:44

Now I'm depressed.

arf
Offline
Joined: 25-11-06
Aug 25 2007 21:32

is that true about lush? now im fucking depressed too.

R.R. Berkman's picture
R.R. Berkman
Offline
Joined: 27-03-07
Aug 25 2007 22:43

There's lots of bars in Alberta who will "pay" female servers to get breast implants after a year of service.
Back when I was a bartender (you know, before I got all of this edumcation and started working as a...bartender) I heard stories of women getting sacked for refusing to get implants. Apparently it isn't a terribly rare happening.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Aug 25 2007 23:11
David in Atlanta wrote:
The Unted States has a charming legal doctrine called Employment at Will.
I doubt that aside from basics like wages and hours any enforceable contract existed and while sexual discrimination is illegal in the US it mostly covers wage equality and harrasement, nether of which seem to apply in this case. In other words the bastard seems to be within the law.

That sucks, I'm pretty sure that over here that would count as a change to working practices.

That said I can't believe that anyone pulled a stunt like Lush did, that's seriously fucked.

edit, according to a quick google it was only for an hour, not all day.
It's also being sold as something staff wanted to do, unsurprisingly, nice to see which side the liberals have ended up on on this one, backing this 'ethical' campaign.

magnifico
Offline
Joined: 29-11-05
Aug 26 2007 10:17
revol68 wrote:
is that true about lush?

can't imagine them trying that shit with UK labour laws, I mean really having to wear an apron and nothing else?

R.R. Berkman's picture
R.R. Berkman
Offline
Joined: 27-03-07
Aug 26 2007 17:42

Serving is a very gendered occupation in North America. I'm casually assuming this is because of the colonial chronology.
Towns west of, well, Toronto were built, quite literally, around brothels. Serving staff were prostitutes/servers, and this trope has reverberated through to the contemporary. Also, when the servers and bartenders unions were busted up in the 1950/60's I'm assuming that many men left the industry for better paying and more respectable employment.
In every single bar I've worked in, men have bartended, and women have served. Then again, I'd take home $50-125 a night, and my servers would often rake in upwards of $300. But it is really fucking degrading work. The bartender can tell you to get the fuck out, the servers tend to just suck it up. I mean if your boss is forcing you to get breast implants or be binned, you work in a fucked up place. Then again, most of the servers I know took the new tits...

gurley's picture
gurley
Offline
Joined: 4-01-07
Aug 27 2007 03:35

Actually, even in occupations where women make up the majority of the workforce they still make considerably less than men. From the National Committee on Pay Equity: 69% of waitstaff are women but men make an average of $346/week while women make on average $301/week a $45 difference. Cashiers (76% women) who are men make $313/week and women make $276. And those in Food Service (which is 50% women) make $325/week if male and $294/week if female.

Of course this does not take into account whether either gender has recently received breast implants. Which I am sure would seriously affect the study.

I don't think I need to school anyone on this forum about the history of working class women fighting for the right to work in male dominated industries, even the right to be allowed to serve liquor. Many unions in the 1940's fought hard to prevent women from being allowed to work behind a bar. While no longer illegal, women still are primarily servers and men bartenders. If women today are able to make a few dollars more an hour in tips by serving drinks (as opposed to mixing them) so be it. There are only a few industries where women seem to have some sort of edge over men...serving and the sex industry. Still men still feel the need to complain that their female co-workers are pulling in a few dollars more an hour in tips. Well let’s see you balance around in stiletto heals with a tray full of drinks after spending two hours in front of the mirror making your face presentable for management. These women earn those tips and then some. So while your calling us sleazy cunts we're laughing all the way to the bank.

But to the point of the original post. It doesn't sound like they quit, it sounds to me like a strike/walkout to improve conditions. I guess they could also try filing unfair labor practice charges since it seems like they were engaging in concerted activity.

gurley's picture
gurley
Offline
Joined: 4-01-07
Aug 27 2007 03:47
Quote:
who callled waitresses sleazy cunts? Surely that would be more appropriate for some of the customers, no?

Sorry, I mis-read your previous post. Its sounded like you were refering to the waitresses as cunts smile