DISCLAIMER: This post is a general overview of Crown Law, colorism, and other discrimination complaints in New York. It is not legal advice. If you have concerns, please make an appointment with an attorney of your choosing and in your jurisdiction.
Modern workplaces are increasingly diverse. Employees have a variety of backgrounds, experiences, and identities that bring opportunities for fresh perspectives and innovation. Yet they also bring beliefs, opinions, and personal interests that sometimes conflict with those of others, including the employer business. This shouldn’t surprise you. Conflicts between supporters of Palestinians and Israelis are not just occurring on college campuses. Race-based disputes do not occur only between white and black employees.
Protected classes are coming into conflict within the walls of businesses across every profession. Often, this leaves well-intentioned individuals and organizations feeling uncertain about their legal responsibilities and how to navigate these intricate human dynamics. This is especially true since the federal government banned Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in its agencies and with its subcontractors.
Make no mistake here. Anti-discrimination laws are in full force and effect. So, you can take your DEI policies off your website and cancel your events, but you still need to make sure your managers and employees understand their rights and responsibilities under laws such as:
- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Age Discrimination in Employment Act
The states in which you operate or have employees working might also have their own laws, and their could be local laws attached. For example, in New York City and State, you must ensure compliance with the Crown Act. I had one of the first cases under this law. Below is a fictionalized discussion of that case, showing how profoundly complex workplace discrimination can be.
What Is New York City’s Crown Law?
For those unfamiliar, “crown laws” primarily address covert race discrimination rooted in hairstyles, particularly those linked to black culture (e.g., tightly-coiled or tightly-curled natural hair, locs, cornrows, twists, braids, Bantu knots, fades, and Afros). Historically, many business leaders held a racist belief that black hairstyles were unsuitable for formal settings. Labeled as unhygienic, messy, or unkempt, even the United States Army and Department of Defense previously banned several black hairstyles. This forced black people to damage their physical, mental, and hair health with repeated manipulation and chemical treatments known to cause hair loss, scalp, damage, and uterine fibroids.
Recognizing that an individual’s choice of hairstyle is deeply personal and rarely affects work ability, New York City’s Crown Law protects employees from having to choose between their livelihoods and cultural or religious identities. However, employers can still impose requirements around maintaining a work appropriate appearance.
In the case that came to me, “Yoselin” had been served with a complaint under the NYC Crown Law. Her employee, “Yvonne,” alleged Yoselin had discriminated against her because of a comment Yoselin made when Yvonne showed up to work looking like she had just rolled out of bed and came to work without changing clothes or grooming.
Hair Discrimination Is Illegal, Not the Word “Hair”
What began as a comment about workplace appearance quickly revealed deeper issues of colorism and unconscious bias. Yvonne was a black woman with dark skin. Yoselin had lighter skin and identified as Latina. Yvonne thought Yoselin looked down on her, and Yvonne didn’t like working for her because Yoselin was frequently socializing and doing business in elite circles. But Yvonne needed a job and planned to use this one as a stepping stone to her own competing business someday. So, she swallowed her pride and kept her eyes open for opportunities–including ones that might give her enough cash to live on while she looked for a different job.
Yvonne didn’t necessarily plan the situation that led to the Crown Law complaint. She just stayed out too late the night before work. Worried she would be late for work, she did basically roll out of bed, grab something to eat, and hop on the subway. She hoped Yoselin would let it slide. She did not, which made Yvonne defensive and angry. Her complaint followed almost immediately. What she didn’t understand was that Yoselin still had every right to ask her to groom before coming to work. That included grooming her hair.
It took us several months to make that clear. In the interim, Yoselin apologized to Yvonne for being blunt about her appearance and hurting her feelings. Yvonne took no responsibility, and her employment was eventually terminated.
Your Enduring Responsibilities Despite DEI Bans
Many businesses mistakenly believe that recent DEI bans have somehow absolved them of their fundamental responsibilities to prevent workplace discrimination. This is a dangerous misconception that can unfortunately lead to legal challenges. The foundational anti-discrimination laws remain firmly in place, and a lack of understanding or vigilance can easily result in disputes that require attorney or other intervention.
To steer clear of conflicts that can escalate into costly and disruptive legal proceedings, it is absolutely essential to remain informed and proactively committed to safeguarding the rights and dignity of all employees. Misunderstandings, often born from a lack of awareness or unchecked biases. These can swiftly morph into significant issues if not addressed with:
- Empathy
- Open communication
- A genuine desire to understand differing perspectives
In other words, keep listening with your third ear–that intuitive part of ourselves that can sense unspoken hurts and misunderstandings.