NewsBreakingOnline

Legal expert says store could be sued under Equality Act after Melanie Stark was told she had wear full make-up at all times A sales assistant at Harrods claims she has been “driven out” of her job over her refusal to wear makeup. Melanie Stark, 24, said her battle with the Knightsbridge store left her “exhausted, stressed and upset”. On two occasions she was sent home; on another she was sent to work in the stockroom. Stark, based in the HMV department in Harrods, said she had been described by one manager as among the best of their employees and worked without makeup for four years, before being asked to comply with the store’s strict dress code. The two-page “ladies” dress code stipulates: “Full makeup at all time: base, blusher, full eyes (not too heavy), lipstick, lip liner and gloss are worn at all time and maintained discreetly (please take into account the store display lighting which has a ‘washing out’ effect).” When she refused she was offered a makeup workshop and told, ‘You can see what you look like with makeup’, she said. “I was appalled. It was insulting. Basically, it was implying it would be an improvement. I don’t understand how they think it is OK to say that.”, she said. I know what I look like with makeup. I have used it, though never at work. But I just could not see how, in this day and age, Harrods could take away my right to choose whether to wear it or not.” Stark had complied with all other aspects of the dress code. “But it’s not like wearing black trousers, or a black shirt. This is my face. “Make up can change your features completely, especially if I was to wear all of what they were asking. I would look like a different person to me. And I never chose to look like that.” Last week she resigned rather than comply with the code after working at the store for five years, three of them part-time while a philosophy, religion and ethics student at King’s College London, and the last two years full-time after completing her masters. “I was happy there, but I’ve been driven out.” One legal expert said Stark could have grounds to sue Harrods. Lawrence Davies, director of Equal Justice solicitors, said she might have a claim under the Equality Act 2010. “On the facts, she performed her role well for five years without makeup, so it is clearly not a valid prerequisite for her role.” Of the dress code, he said “custom and practice would suggest that her contract has changed over the years to allow her to not wear makeup”. Stark said she had been given a copy of the dress code when she joined HMV at Harrods aged 19, and had been given store approval after an interview during which she did not wear any makeup. Harrods had not sought to enforce the code until last August when, after a “floor walk” by senior managers, she was sent home for refusing to wear it. In a letter to Harrods at the time she said: “To be told that one’s face is inadequate is extremely degrading.” She had a commendation for customer services, had been awarded 94% in a “mystery shop”, on which unsuspecting staff were monitored, and met every other requirement in HMV’s music section. The next day, she was put to work in the stockroom, away from view. She had received good support from HMV throughout, she said. The conflict was with Harrods. Stark was summoned to a meeting with her Harrods floor manager During this, she said, she was told: “You’ve got two options. You wear make up or you leave”. She said she was told: “We’re not making you look like the girls on the beauty counter” and it was suggested she could “just wear eyeliner and lipstick”. She said: “But if that was my choice, surely I had the choice to wear none.” On that occasion, Harrods appear to have backed down. She returned to work and continued without wearing makeup until three weeks ago, when, during a Powerpoint presentation a new floor manager told staff: “Girls. I want you to be made up.” “Alarm bells started ringing,” she said. “Off I go again, another meeting.” She was briefly transferred to HMV’s Bayswater store while a resolution was sought – but had already decided to resign. “I just could not go through with it all again. I wasn’t going to compromise, but neither were they,” she said. “And I felt it was time to move on.” A Harrods spokeswoman said: “All our staff are subject to a dress code which they sign up to on joining the company, which relates to an overall polished appearance. Our records show that discussions with Melanie Stark concerned a general lack of adherence to the dress code. However, no action was taken and she subsequently decided to leave the business of her own accord with no reference made to dress code.” Savile Row claim Company dress codes and “look” policies are common but their legality has been challenged, with mixed results. The US clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch was accused of “hiding” a sales assistant in a stockroom at its flagship London outlet in Savile Row because her prosthetic arm did not fit with its “look policy”. Riam Dean, a 22-year-old law student from Greenford, west London, claimed she was removed from the shopfloor when management became aware of her disability. Dean, who was born without her left forearm and has worn a prosthetic limb since she was three months old, sued for disability discrimination after she was left “personally diminished and humiliated” when she refused to remove her cardigan at work last summer. In 2009 a tribunal awarded her £8,000 for unlawful harassment. Clare Murray, of the specialist employment law experts CM Murray, said case law supported the right of employers to impose dress codes with different requirements for women and men provided there were “equivalent” requirements. “But employers must be able to show a good business reason,” she said. Employers also needed to consider religious and cultural implications. Caroline Davies Harrods dress code Women Hair Trimmed regularly and styled to flatter features. May have subtle highlights or colour but must be natural looking and complementary to skin tone. No regrowth. Jewellery One earring per ear. Pearls or diamond studs preferred. One ring per hand with exception of wedding & engagement rings. No visible tattoos, sovereigns, mismatched jewellery, scrunchies, large clips or hoop earrings. Footwear Smart black leather shoes such as court shoes with stiletto or kitten heel. Men Hair Clean, well groomed, complementary to skin tone. Beards Clean shaven or full beards. NO goatees or moustaches of contemporary style. Sideburns Must be no longer than mid-ear length or wider than one inch. Nails Well-manicured polished nails. Employment law Retail industry Discrimination at work Work & careers Caroline Davies guardian.co.uk