Owing to the increasing costs of hiring new employees, a lot of Companies have settled for independent contractors. Currently, there has been a lot of controversy regarding the dress code of employees at work in addition to other issues of employment, which threaten the work of an individual. Janice` case presents an excellent example of the kind of dilemma that most workers are faced with each day during working hours. Moreover, such matters not only affect the employees but also the employer who may end up being sued for violating an employee`s right to privacy. Some of the dress code requirements are reasonable, however, others are outrageous. In which case they end up infuriating the workers. This essay will seek to offer a clear elucidation of Janice` case.
Classification of Janice
An employer has to be careful by ascertaining that the dress codes do not afoul anti-discrimination laws. Dream massage has to realize that the terms of the contract between them and Janice specify that she is not subject to tax withholding and also benefits accrued to other employees at work. This alone is a clear indication that she should be classified as an independent contract and not an employee of the Company. She can, therefore, not be expected to adhere to the same regulations set for the other employees at work. Dress code in particular is a critical issue such that the independent contractor may wish to adorn the attire which they deem representative of her brand. In which case it would be unjustifiable for the employer to impinge on such rights.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Before the initiation of the contract, it is always prudent for the employer to specify the factors which they would appreciate the independent contractor complying with. By way of such specifications, the contractor can opt to be party to the contract or opt out. This appears to be missing in Janice` case, since the issues being raised regarding her dress code do not accentuate the agreement between her and the Company. Additionally, the independent contractor law clearly specifies that the Company is not in a position to exercise the same kind of control over the independent contractor as it does to its workers (Gaines, 2016). Janice is, therefore, at will to make her own decisions as she deems fit since the Company is her customer.
Dream Massage` Potential Violation
There is no doubt that Dream Massage has potentially violated employment discrimination laws in Janice` case. In some religions, there is a possibility that the specific dictates on how the congregants should dress is likely to wreak havoc at work. The employment law, nevertheless offers protection to employees in light of such issues. Janice is experiencing religious discrimination from Dream Massage. By indicating that there is a strict policy restricting the hijab at work, it appears that she`s being targeted, and bias is undoubtedly imminent at work. This implies that even if she was being subjected to the Company`s dress code policy, the organization would still be in violation owing to religious discrimination which is a serious issue.
There are five specific religions which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission focuses on, namely: Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism (Collins, 1990). Some of the areas which the commission offers protection to workers in light of discrimination on such basis is on matters pertaining to: Training, contract termination, promotions and wages. Some religions such as Islam have rigid requirements regarding the dress code, especially for women. The law, thus, requires the employers not to discriminate against such workers. Dream Massage is, therefore, liable to provide reasonable accommodation in Janice` case or end up facing a complaint on religious discrimination.
Ethical Considerations
There are many ethical considerations which can be associated with the maintenance of a rigid company dress policy. For instance, religious considerations have to be made, whereby specifications are made by offering due considerations to people from all religions. Secondly, gender identity considerations also emanate whereby the dress requirements for men differ from those of their female counterparts ( Naughton et al., 2016 ). For instance, modifications have to be made on uniform in a manner that considers both male and female individuals. Also disability considerations have to be made to avoid discriminating the physically impaired individuals at work. This assists especially in unfortunate incidents whereby an employee of a firm is involved in an accident and still manages to go back to work, though they end up being physically impaired ( Naughton et al., 2016 ). In such a case, the employer is expected to relax the dress code restrictions on the employee in order to ascertain their comfort at work.
It may also offer consideration for legal laws established to cater for discrimination of workers in an organization, which vary depending on the region. This will ensure that the policies created by the Company do not conflict with the ones devised in the legal system. Moreover, the employer has to consider the idea that a dress code policy should be clear and specific. The reason for this is to ensure that there is no room for error in light of a situation where an employee chooses to sue the Company on grounds of discrimination. In addition to this, the dress code policies should be created in a manner such that they are flexible enough to allow room for adjustment. Failure to adhere to some of these aspects is likely to make a Company liable to be sued for discriminatory dress code policies.
References
Collins, H. (1990). Independent contractors and the challenge of vertical disintegration to employment protection laws. Oxford J. Legal Stud. , 10 , 353.
Gaines, A. (2016). Worker Classification: Employee or Independent Contractor. Ark. Law. 51 , 14.
Naughton, C. A., Schweiger, T. A., Angelo, L. B., Lea Bonner, C., Dhing, C. W., & Farley, J. F. (2016). Expanding dress code requirements in the doctor of pharmacy program. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education , 80 (5), 74.
