Is your piercing worth your job? Kimberly Cloutier, a Costco employee, faced that question when her manager told her she must remove her earrings and her eyebrow piercing if she wanted to continue working for Costco.

Cloutier started with Costco's West Springfield, Mass., store in July 1997 as a front-end assistant. In September of that year, she started working in the store's deli but moved back to the front after Costco revised its dress code to prohibit food handlers from wearing jewelry.

A few months later, Cloutier was promoted to cashier, where she worked for a couple of years. She also started wearing an eyebrow piercing. But in March 2001, Costco further revised its dress code to prohibit all facial jewelry, except earrings. And when Cloutier's supervisor asked that she remove her eyebrow piercing, she refused.

During the years Cloutier worked at Costco, she joined the Church of Body Modification. Cloutier claimed her eyebrow piercing could not be removed because of her religious beliefs and eventually filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC investigated and then filed a lawsuit against Costco, Cloutier v. Costco. 

What's Legal?

"[Cloutier v. Costco] is one of my favorite cases in the world because it's a lively case, so to speak," says Jonathan Segal, partner and vice chair of the employment-services group at Philadelphia-based law firm Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen.

"You have a generational issue and that's a diversity issue," says Segal. "A lot of baby boomers, who horrified their parents with long hair, are horrified with the piercings of the younger generations. But an employer has a right to set a reasonable dress code that could include restrictions on hair, piercings, attire and a variety of things. There's nothing unlawful about an employer saying, 'We don't want body piercings.'"

Cloutier's case should serve as a warning for college students, who are expressing their individuality with a facial piercing while also hoping to be gainfully employed once they graduate. Students should also consider the Society for Human Resource Management's 2006 survey in which 35.9 percent of human-resource professionals surveyed said their companies had dress codes that covered body piercing and 22.3 had dress codes that cover body art.

There isn't a survey that indicates the prevalence of facial piercings. The Gallup Organization, however, conducted a survey of teenagers in 2005 that indicated that young people consider body piercing reasonable for certain ages. Teenagers surveyed said they believe a reasonable age for a person to get ears pierced is 11, while a reasonable age to get other body parts pierced is 17.

The piercings teenagers and young adults get could affect their employment options later, says Melanie Holmes, vice president, world of work solutions at Manpower. "With generations changing [in corporate America] and with the talent crunch that is forcing workplaces to be more tolerant, these things will become more accepted," Holmes says. "But it could affect your upward mobility, so I would leave the body art at home and let the hiring manager look at the hole."

Piercing-industry experts say the practice is gaining in popularity. More women tend to pierce their bodies than men and the popular place now is the nose, says James Weber, medical liaison for the Association of Professional Piercers and owner of Infinite Body Piercing, a Philadelphia-based shop.

"Right now, the popular piercing is the nostril, and most customers are college women," says Weber, who sees more acceptance of facial piercings in general but not complete approval in corporate America.

Weber makes the point that it might be easier for executives of color, such as East Indian female executives, to receive a cultural or religious exemption from a corporate dress code when a nose piercing is the concern. East Indians and other people may practice Ayurvedic medicine, which associates piercing the nostrils with female reproduction.

Segal suspects any court would rule in favor of an employer if an employee who wants to wear facial piercings is interacting with consumers. He also says that employers should not ask if a facial piercing is linked to religious observance. An employer should just inform the employee that the piercing is not permitted. If the employee says the piercing is for religious observance, the employee's supervisor should consult human resources.

"If an employee offers that they [have facial piercings] for a religious reason, then the manager should neither accept that reason at face value nor dismiss that reason at face value," says Segal. "Their reason may be valid, but the employer may have a counter interest, so the manager should report the claim to human resources."

Cloutier's case demonstrates that religious claims most likely will not prevent an employer from prohibiting facial piercings, as they can be removed. Even the Church of Body Modification does not require that piercings remain in the body at all times. Cloutier lost her case because the court ruled that her religious beliefs did not require her facial jewelry to remain in her face at all times.

"I think at some point you have to make a decision," says Weber. "There's a reason corporate environments insist on homogenous dress. You often do have to make a choice, and there often isn't an option to do both."

More Work Force>>

digg this | mixx! | reddit | del.icio.us | Newsvine  e-mail article |  print | post comments | NEWSLETTER

Send Your Comments About This Article Now