Black women's hair is 2.5 times more likely to be perceived as unprofessional compared to other colors, cuts or textures, according to a parliamentary report published in March 2024 which is based on a study published in 2023 led by Dove and LinkedIn;
one in three blonde women dyes their hair brown to be able to more easily access positions of responsibility;
red-haired women are considered nymphomaniacs and dangerous, while red-haired men are supposed to be ugly and dirty, we can still read in this report;
bald men, finally, have less chance of getting a job interview and therefore a job...
On the evening of Wednesday March 27, the National Assembly debated a bill aimed at recognizing and penalizing hair discrimination at work.
“While discrimination linked to hair style and texture are issues widely addressed in the United States and the United Kingdom, the latter are largely ignored in France
,” writes rapporteur Olivier Serva, deputy (Liot) of Guadeloupe.
The text contains only a single article.
Symbolic aspects, “practical dimension”
The proposal aims to integrate into the field of criminal repression of discrimination,
“any discrimination or distinction based on the texture, color, length or style of hair of an individual”
.
The text therefore seeks to establish
“a consistency of the proposed penal system with the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in the Labor Code”
, the General Civil Service Code as well as the order of January 4, 2005 relating to civil servants in Polynesia French.
Discrimination defined in particular in article 225-1 of the Penal Code (which already includes origin, sex, physical appearance, political opinion, etc.) is punishable by three years' imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros when it consists of
“refusing to hire, sanctioning or dismissing a person”
or
“obstructing the normal exercise of an economic activity”
, according to article 225-2 of the same text .
Beyond the symbolic aspect
“making it possible to make visible a subject too much ignored by public authorities”
, this proposed law has a
“real practical dimension, by filling a gap in our law”
, maintains the report.
“Typical example of a bad idea”
In the United States, California was the first state to adopt a “Crown Act” in July 2019 to combat hair discrimination.
Since then, 20 states and 30 cities across the country have adopted similar legislation, like New Jersey, New York, Louisiana and Colorado, notes the parliamentary report.
This text is not unanimous among lawyers specializing in labor law and among human resources managers (HRD).
“This is a typical example of a bad idea: there is no legal vacuum
,” Eric Rocheblave, a lawyer specializing in labor law, told AFP.
The Labor Code already provides that
“physical appearance is a cause of discrimination”
even if the law
“does not explicitly provide for hair discrimination
,” he says.
In the event of discrimination
“because of hair, lack of hair, color, length or appearance, I could link it to already existing texts,”
he added, still to Agence France Presse.