Being beautiful ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. Or so it seems from the legal-news headlines.
First, there are the “Borgata Babes.” The female cocktail servers at Borgata Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, known as Borgata Babes, challenged the legality of their employer’s policy prohibiting them from gaining more than 7% of their body weight after they were hired. The Babes lost the lawsuit, though, when a New Jersey judge granted Borgata’s motion for summary judgment.
The cocktail servers alleged that the hotel created a culture of humiliation and harassment with its dress
code but the court disagreed, finding that the policy did not constitute unlawful gender-based discrimination. Particularly noteworthy was the court’s commentary about the potential problems associated with using the term “babe” to describe a workforce:
From the court’s perspective, the term “babe” is at best undignified and at worst degrading. . . . Regardless, there are people in our society who view “babe” as playful flattery . . . To the chagrin of those in our society hoping to leave sexual stereotypes behind, some of those people are female. And some of these people may be among the plaintiffs.
But “undignified” isn’t reserved just for cocktail waitresses. Bob Ambrogi tweeted earlier this week about the news organization in L.A. that reminded its female employees to dress professionally, particularly when attending a court hearing or other matter at the courthouse. Ok, well, the memo wasn’t actually addressed to, “All Female Journalists” but only women received it.
Dress codes are tough stuff. They make for awkward conversations and lots of grey areas. And it is entirely appropriate for a news agency to require its reporters to dress with the appropriate level of decorum whenever they are in court. But was it really only the women who had to be “reminded” of the policy? Maybe it was but it sure wouldn’t have hurt to send the memo to all hands on deck.
The subject of appropriate decorum and dress code for the legal profession brings us to our final story of the day. As reported by Sean O’Sullivan of the News Journal, a recently admitted Delaware lawyer has raised quite a stir about his job-search strategy. Said strategy involves an email to nearly every lawyer in the State, to which he attached a picture of himself (a “selfie”) wearing a Villanova t-shirt (my alma matter, no less), with the sleeves rolled up, displaying his well-toned arms (i.e., his “guns”).
The stir over this unsolicited and unconventional email was soon trumped by the half-naked selfie posted on his Facebook page (which, of course, is public), with a handwritten sign taped to the mirror in which the words “lawyer” and “escort” were used in a single (grammatically incorrect but multi-colored) sentence. I’m quoted in the article as saying, among other things, that the whole thing is”just wrong on so many levels.” Indeed.
Really. If you don’t believe me, go see for yourself. And, while you’re there, be sure to check out the video the hopeful job seeker posted in response to the criticism he’s been receiving. And, yes, the video does include him flexing his guns for the camera.
BONUS: I know, I know. I said that was the final story for today. But here’s a Friday-morning bonus for you. At Mashable.com, there’s an entertaining comic titled, “The Pros and Cons of Being Tall.” Happy Friday!