A London receptionist refused to wear heels and was dismissed from her job. Now she’s petitioning...

[yellowcanine]

38. Good points with a couple of caveats

There is some question as to when and if this requirement was being consistently enforced.

Ms Thorp said she would have struggled to work a full day in high heels and had asked to wear the smart flat shoes she had worn to the office in Embankment.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-36264229

Also, I would draw a distinction between strictly "professional appearance" dress codes - no jeans, t shirts etc. and something like heels, which have health implications, when I suggest that some parts of dress codes may not be enforced. And there actually is evidence here that this might be the case.

Ms. Thorp appears to be a temp who had worked at other offices and wore flat shoes with no problem, whether for the same agency or not, hard to tell. When she showed up at this particular office, (a company which did not actually have this as a requirement), it suddenly became an issue. That in itself seems a bit odd to me, almost as if someone had some kind of agenda here (Such as a male who "likes" women in heels?). I say I fault the supervisor because requiring heels has health implications. If someone tells me they cannot wear heels for nine hours, I would want to pay attention to that. With ADA, we talk about "reasonable accommodation." It is not an ADA issue - different country and the woman did not claim a disability. But there is a common law or at least a common sense principle here. A good supervisor does not knowingly force an employee to choose between their health and being able to work that day. For moral and practical reasons if not for legal ones. A reasonable accommodation would be to allow flat shoes to be worn. The woman can still do the job and there is nothing to say that she is not professional in appearance. If the woman were to wear the heels as required by the supervisor and gets injured as a result, that supervisor has now unnecessarily exposed his/her company to legal liability - maybe not as serious an issue in the U.K. which has National Health Insurance - not sure how workplace accidents are handled there - but in the U.S. this could create serious problems with Workman's Comp - at the least there would be an investigation as to why a reasonable accommodation was not offered the employee when she stated she could not work in the heels. The insurance company would be justified in raising rates for this kind of behavior. And good companies and good supervisors do not elevate appearance over employee health.