HR Strange But True!
January 29, 2009

A couple of late responses came in for our question about whether Hooters’ women-only hiring policy is unlawful discrimination. Both HR professionals strongly oppose the policy and presented strong arguments against it. Since we had a lot more pro-Hooters arguments last week (see HR's Take on Hooters Hiring Policy), we wanted to include more opposing views this week.

“How would this be perceived by society if the gender role were reversed? For instance, What the women suing are overlooking is one of the qualifications of the job, and that is you do need to be a man. The clients are women going for a 'man' to wait on them. Hooters is in the right to hire only men in this case. My assumption is that society would perceive this statement to be discriminatory because it prohibits females from getting positions but when the gender roles are reversed, it's okay. Equal rights mean equal rights for both sides.” -- Anonymous.

“I think discrimination is discrimination. Furthermore, how could it be ‘reasonably necessary' for Hooters waiters to be female in order to perform their duties, unless the company is running a bordello, which is still illegal in most states? Why would serving food require being female in this day and age?” -- Anonymous

TGIF - It's HR
Strange But True
Get your weekend off to a great start with your own copy of HR Strange But True e-mailed to you each Friday as part of the HR Daily Advisor, absolutely free. Catch up on the latest odd, offbeat, and humorous HR stories provided by HR Strange But True as well as a daily tip from the award winning HR Daily Advisor. Just enter your e-mail address and click "Go."
'HR Strange But True' Archive
View past articles by month and year
Copyright � 2016 Business & Legal Resources. All rights reserved. 800-727-5257
This document was published on
Document URL: