Receptionist 'sent home from PwC for not wearing high heels'

theguardian.com

10 points·okket··6 comments

Ask PWC to pay for the heels if they're a mandatory job requirement. As accountants, they should know that, under this assumption, they would be a legitimate expense.

They will refuse to pay.

In America, as far as I can tell, you can't make separate dress codes for men and women. You can admire our disallow certain clothing, but the rules apply to everyone. As alluded to in the article, there is an exception if it actually affects performance of the job, which is why Las Vegas casinos hire their "waitresses" as "models" instead, so they can regulate their appearance.

The article does mention this:

'They can set up different codes for men and women, as long as there's an "equivalent level of smartness".'

Which kind of make sense, as men and women do tend to use different types of clothing.

So a man could legally turn up to work in a skirt (where that is an option for women)?

Not judging - I'm just curious as to how far the rules reach, I don't even know how this works in the UK

Yeah - I've at least heard a story of a workplace where short skirts were allowed but shorts weren't. So a guy wore a short skirt in protest until they let him wear shorts to work.

Granted, it was called a kilt, but I've worked with many coworkers in skirts.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com