In Dansie v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis the EAT held that a male cadet had not been discriminated again on grounds of his sex when he was told that, in accordance with a dress code which applied to both sexes, he could not work with his shoulder-length hair tied in a bun and must have it cut. A female comparator would have been treated in exactly the same way.
The Police Dress Code states: “Hair must be neat, not allowed to cover the ears and … worn above the collar. For safety reasons, ponytails are not permitted and long hair must be neatly and securely fastened up and worn relatively close to the head.” Before starting his training as a police officer, Mr Dansie asked whether his hair would meet dress-code requirements and was told that it would. He arrived for training with his shoulder length hair tied in a bun: he was told to have it cut, which he did to avoid disciplinary action. He claimed sex discrimination, arguing that a female in the same circumstances would not have been required to have her hair cut.
The EAT upheld the tribunal’s finding that Mr Dansie had not been discriminated against on the grounds of his sex. The guidelines issued to managers on the dress code applied equally to both men and women. The tribunal was fully entitled to conclude that a female comparator who failed to comply with a gender neutral dress/appearance code necessary for this disciplined service, particularly when on basic training, would have been treated in exactly the same way as Mr Dansie.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
