RecruitingBlogscom

Follow Us:

Here we are on the weekend before Christmas and the Iowa Supreme Court handed us an early "gift" Before I explain what the gift was, let me take you back in time to when Bobby Darin was still performing and he sag the following words:

"WelI … I don’t know what you got But it’s got me and baby I’m hooked Like a fish in the sea. You make angles call from above. You could make the Devil fall in love. An-a … who-o-o wouldn’t fall for irresistible you."

Over the past several decades we have seen the requirements for our talent acquisition efforts become more difficult. We have to be sure that the job requirements are bona fide occupational qualifications - in other words the requirements for the job actually meet the skills needed to perform the duties of the position. We can't tell someone that we will not hire them based on gun ownership, sexual orientation, age, religious beliefs, where we came from or health status. Now the Iowa Supreme Court adds a new twist.

In the case before them, a Dentist had hired a dental technician a decade ago. He admitted to his wife that he could not keep his eyes off of her. The wife's response was that either she goes or I do. The Dentist fired her.

The Iowa Supreme Court decided that it is perfectly legal to fire someone who is irresistible . Now let me get this straight, everyone of us whether male or female has walked into a work environment and found that employee who is stunningly attractive. In the majority of cases we may not take any actions on those beliefs but it now becomes, at least in Iowa, grounds for taking away someones livelihood. Not because she or he has done anything wrong but because their appearance can jeopardize a marriage. So does that mean going forward we need to add to the job description that an individual cannot be too attractive for fear of distracting the workplace? We are not talking about a worker undergoing sexual harassment, we are talking about a worker who just plain looks too good.

I apologize to HR.net for stealing his format. Steve I promise it is a one time only event.

Views: 182

Tags: HR, Leadership, Management

Comment by Barbara Goldman on December 24, 2012 at 4:45pm

It's usually the other way around. I have had candidates rejected because they were ugly. It is as disgusting as firing someone for being too attractive. I saw the picture of the woman who was fired. She was normally attractive, without supermodel looks. Both eyes were planted on the side of her face in a lovely way, her chin wasn't weak, and her lips and nose all normal. The employer was the problem. What a creep.

Comment

You need to be a member of RecruitingBlogs to add comments!

Join RecruitingBlogs

© 2014   Created by RecruitingBlogs.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

scroll to the top