Too ‘Hot’ for Comfort, Temp Sues Orthodox Bosses in Failure to Communicate
Latest update: December 12th, 2012
print
tell a friend
Lauren Odes with her celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred at Monday's press conference.
Photo Credit: Screen shot
If the Asifah last Sunday had touched on that – empowering Haredi men to spell out that which disturbs them about another person’s attire or behavior or even physical attributes, directly and honestly, without forgetting the other’s image of God – it would have been a smashing, historic success.
I fear that the opposite was true, and the Asifah was about getting even more insular and secluded culturally.
tell a friendAbout the Author: JewishPress.com Senior Internet Editor Yori Yanover has been a working journalist since age 17, before he enlisted and worked for Ba'Machane Nachal. Since then he has worked for Israel Shelanu, the US supplement of Yedioth, JCN18.com, USAJewish.com, Lubavitch News Service, Arutz 7 (as DJ on the high seas), and the Grand Street News. He has published two fun books: The Cabalist's Daughter: A Novel of Practical Messianic Redemption, and How Would God REALLY Vote.
You might also be interested in:
You must log in to post a comment.
No Responses to “Too ‘Hot’ for Comfort, Temp Sues Orthodox Bosses in Failure to Communicate”
2
Loading ...
I am afraid that, the attraction a man may feel for a woman, is in no way the responsibility of the woman. It is the man's responsibility to train himself to resist temptation. The attractiveness of women has so far been used as an excuse for everything from marrying them before their 12th birthday, to raping them, denying them the right to vote, drive, read, work, etc., or forcing them to hide from scalp to toes under a moving tent. Enough already. Men, control yourselves and stop putting the responsibility for your lust on us. When come the time to face Hashem, I doubt you will find much indulgence for your twisted thinking and forcing the companion he gave you into servitude.
Dear Muriel,
With all due respect, your advice is "Just say no," in the immortal words of Nancy Reagan. But as forceful and righteous as that sentiment may be, it has not proven to be effective in curbin human vice.
However, honesty about the issue can go a long way. Where control may be out of reach, admitting that control is not the way to go has yielded many a success story regarding a plethora of undesired behavior.
It's not that simple. As a daughter, a sister, a wife, the mother of 4 sons (now grown), and an employee for many years, I've observed that the large majority of men are perfectly able to accept when a woman is off limit and do not suffer any trauma from resisting temptation. Self-control may be too hard for some men, but it doesn't give them the right to saddle women with the responsibility for their lust, nor does it allow men to exile women from society. If a man is unable to control his lust, then he should remove himself from the temptation and telecommute from home. In the case of this employer however, the solution was even simpler: he could have provided his employees with a decent uniform.
Muriel spouts hypocritical narishkeit. The furthest extension of her position is that women may worked naked, or with pasties and a string bikini, with impunity. B.S. straight from the playbook of N.O.W. and other feminazis. It is a simple, incontrovertible fact of nature that women – their shape, their appearance – are highly, distractedly sexually attractive to normal men. Women – including con-artist deniers like Muriel – are well aware of this. As the article notes, what about the other workers' rights?!
This has nothing to do with men not being able to control themselves. Sheesh, we aren't muslims. (that is their reasoning). It has to do with men being around immodesty. They can control themselves fine, but such is not the place for a Holy person.
But that being said, this issue is about the rights of a business owner. The woman has no right to dress however she wants in someone else's business. I have no idea what these guys were thinking when they hired her, but she has no right to sue.
If she had any class, (she worked there what? A few months at most? maybe less?) she would have left without issues.
This isn't about her rights, or women's rights, or discrimination it is about MONEY!
A dress code policy is perfectly legitimate for a business to enforce. Their mistake is probably in not officially publishing one.
Typical small business boo-boo.
No. A dress code that has nothing to do with health or safety on an employee who works in a warehouse is not legitimate. This company does not require uniforms. Saying someone is dressing too "hot" is not legal and she will rightly win the case.
I am an owner in a small business. The overwhelming majority of our employees are women in their 30s and 40s. There is nothing "typical" about this "mistake." It doesn't take a Ph.D. in law to recognize the hazzards here. We have a dress code. It absolutely requires professional attire–not merely for "health" but also for professionalism. Sexy/revealing is not cool. If it becomes a problem, feedback is given *and documented meticulously." A clear file of communication must be created before firing someone or we will be sued. And we know it. Because it's obvious.
I just wonder why so-called Super Frum Jews are making lingerie? Especially the kinds of lingerie I heard they make.
Is the law going to require that every employer — no matter how big or small — publish a dress code?
If I were to ask my cleaning lady or nanny to dress or not dress in a certain way when she's working in my house, am I to expect Gloria Allred knocking on my door? Am I required to publish a "dress code" and post it on my front door?
No, but you'll suffer the consequences if you don't. This is what a litigious society creates. There's no personal responsibility.
I would love to see Allred walk into court wearing some hoochie outfit, or a pair of sweats and a workout top, and see if the judge doesn't throw her ass into a cell for contempt.
Better yet, the DEFENSE lawyer should, and say, "if you hold me in contempt, you've rendered the verdict on this case."
David Berenthal, thoughts?
Daniel Melman Yes. If you want to avoid (and/or successfully defend) wrongful termination and/or sexual harrassment suits, an ounce of risk management in the first place goes a long way.
Agree with Marc (at least on this one!). They can enforce a dress code, if they have one. Their problem is that this seems to have been handled as a one-off situation. Further, even when they complained, it does not sound as if they were specific enough about how she should dress. Not everyone has the same interpretation of "modest". They can't criticize her body shape, but they can have a universally-applied dress code that specifies things like sleeve length, collar height, skirt length, etc. It isn't hard, my kids' elementary schools even publish those guidelines in their student handbook.
I actually also agree–they can absolutely have a consistently applied and clearly communicated dress code.
Yarden Frankl you're absolutely wrong.
exactly. With a coherent dress code, there would have been no problem