depends on how you defend them under that law as a spiritual or religious expression they are protected, as are all things spiritual or religious.
but if you use the cultural or racial argument they are not protected.
i do not agree with that court ruling because as it was stated they say "dreadlocks are not protected as a cultural or racial expression because they can be changed" but by that definition so can hair txture, eye color, the shape of facial features and in fact the color of the skin through chemical and/or surgical methods
it only applies to companies that have a 'racially neutral' dress code clause
it has very limited power because of that
it is also very likely that if challenged in court 'racially neutral' clauses could be unconstitutional and a violation of 1st amendment rights at the very least
its on par with requiring gender neutral dress codes
that was 1 court ruling that if challenged i guarantee would be overturned by a higher court.
that court ruling although sets a precedent till overturned applied to a single case in a singe company that had that racially neutral clause
would you want to work in a company that requires a homogenized neutrality like that?
Creator and head dreadhead at:
Glider pilot student at:
Freedoms wings international
updated by @soaring-eagle: 04/05/17 09:43:38PM