Prepare:In your first post in this discussion, you will become familiar withthe case of Abercrombie & Fitch by means of the relevant material inthe Required Resources this week. There is also a specific mediafeature located at the end of Section 5.3 of the textbook titledWorkplace Discrimination: Abercrombie & Fitch. In order to beprepared for this task, you will need to complete the required readingsand media listed.

Reflect: There are two sides to consider in theAbercrombie & Fitch case. On the one hand, we have the jobcandidate’s side. She went to the job interview wearing a hijab. Theinterviewer did not remark on the hijab, and the candidate also did notvolunteer that her religious beliefs required her to wear a hijab. Shewas subsequently not hired based on the perception that her appearancewas incongruous with the company’s look policy. For example, caps arenot permitted and the male sales associates (referred to as “models” inthe company’s corporate language) are often shirtless and in sweatpantsin order to create the mood at the stores for the aesthetic for whichAbercrombie & Fitch has become known: young, preppy, and hormonallycharged. When she was notified that she was not hired for the position,she filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissionthat, in turn, filed a lawsuit on her behalf alleging a violation ofTitle VII.

On the other hand, we have Abercrombie & Fitch’s side. As acompany doing business in the United States, Abercrombie & Fitch islegally permitted to hire those employees who fit its look policy. Thisis no different from the look requirements for the Dallas CowboysCheerleaders, the Chicago Bulls, the New York City Ballet company, orfor jockeys hired by thoroughbred owners to race them at the KentuckyDerby. In all of these cases, there are height, size, and other lookrequirements for employment that are justified by the particular demandsand aesthetics of the position. She was found to be qualified for thejob but her dress was clearly in conflict with Abercrombie & Fitch’slook policy. Yet, the job applicant knowingly sought employment at thisretailer.

Accordingto the law, should a special accommodation be required due to areligious practice, then Title VII dictates that the look requirementsgive way to the religious requirement in order not to be considered anact of religious discrimination.

The EEOC prevailed in the District Court, but this judgment wasreversed by the Tenth Circuit on the ground that failure-to-accommodateliability only attaches when a job candidate provides the potentialemployer with knowledge of the need for an accommodation due toreligious practice. Once it reached the Supreme Court, the decision wasmade in favor of the job candidate. According to Justice Scalia,

Title VII does not demand mere neutralitywith regard to religious practices—that they be treated no worse thanother practices. Rather, it gives them favored treatment, affirmativelyobligating employers not “to fail or refuse to hire or discharge anyindividual . . . because of such individual’s” “religious observance andpractice.” An employer is surely entitled to have, for example, a noheadwear policy as an ordinary matter. But when an applicant requires anaccommodation as an “aspec[t] of religious . . . practice,” it is noresponse that the subsequent “fail[ure] . . . to hire” was due to anotherwise-neutral policy. Title VII requires otherwise-neutral policiesto give way to the need for an accommodation.

The only dissenting opinion was that of Justice Thomas who wrote:

Mere application of a neutral policycannot constitute “intentional discrimination.”…I would hold thatAbercrombie’s conduct did not constitute “intentional discrimination.”Abercrombie refused to create an exception to its neutral Look Policyfor Samantha Elauf ’s religious practice of wearing a headscarf… Indoing so, it did not treat religious practices less favorably thansimilar secular practices, but instead remained neutral with regard toreligious practices…Resisting this straightforward application of§1981a, the majority expands the meaning of “intentional discrimination”to include a refusal to give a religious applicant “favoredtreatment.”…But contrary to the majority’s assumption, this novel theoryof discrimination is not commanded by the relevant statutory text.

Write: In the first part of your initial post, youwill need to introduce the Abercrombie & Fitch lawsuit. In thisintroduction, you will also need to (1) articulate the freedoms thatcompanies in the United States enjoy given our relatively-free marketsystem and (2) present the Title VII regulations concerning employmentdiscrimination. These will provide the setting for you to be able toexamine how the nation’s laws affect the hiring practices of Abercrombie& Fitch and other companies whose hiring policy includes aparticular aesthetic for employees.

In the second part of your initial post, present your analysis ofthis case in a way that identifies which entities (Abercrombie &Fitch as a corporation, the economic system in the USA, the regulatorycontrol of the state, or all of these) have a role in the problem thatled to the lawsuit under examination. In your analysis, you must assessthe positive or negative effects of the interplay between businessactivity and one of the following: the free-market system, advertising,hiring regulations, or corporate social responsibility. Your focus mustbe an ethical analysis of this interplay. Be sure to clearly identifythe ethical theory that you are applying in your analysis, and tosupport your analysis by reliable and/or scholarly sources.

Requirements for Your Initial Post:

• Your initial post should be at least 350 words inlength and have citations and references in APA notation. It shouldaddress the prompt in its entirety. This means that you should not splityour response to the prompt in multiple posts. Your examination shouldbe both thorough and succinct. This is a combination that demands timeand thought, so give yourself sufficient time to draft and revise.
• Please be advised that until you post, you will not see what yourfellow students are posting. Once you submit your post, you will be ableto view the posts from your other classmates. You can then proceed toreply to at least two different threads based on the required materialfor this discussion.
• Your list of references for your initial post should include notonly the video and the other required material for this discussion, aswell as the Instructor Guidance and any other announcements presented toyou by your professor. Use all of the material presented to you in thecourse and by your professor, in addition to any other sources that youconsulted to inform yourself about this case (but not Wikipedia orsimilar sources).
• Your initial post for this discussion should be submittd.
  

  Required Resources

  Text

  Fieser, J. (2015). Introduction to business ethics [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/

• Chapter 5: Discrimination in the Workplace
• Chapter 6: Employees

Ashford Course Materials

Hardy, J, Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015). Section 9.1: The Argumentative Essay. In With good reason: A guide to critical thinking. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/

• Section 9.1: The Argumentative Essay is a section of Chapter 9 ofthe introductory course in logic textbook that is employed in the PHI103Informal Logic course offered at Ashford University. The link for thissource will take you to a PDF format of this chapter. Section 9.1introduces the thesis and premises in an argumentative essay, which areelements that students in this course must employ in both assignments inthis course.

Hardy, J, Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015). Section 9.2: Strengthening the Argumentative Essay. In With good reason: A guide to critical thinking. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/

• Section 9.2: Strengthening the Argumentative Essay is a section ofChapter 9 of the introductory course in logic textbook that is employedin the PHI103 Informal Logic course offered at Ashford University. Thelink for this source will take you to a PDF format of this chapter. Forthe purposes of the work for this week, it will be necessary to readonly thesubsection called Clarification and Support. This subsectionexplains the kind of support needed in an argumentative essay for theclaims offered in its premises, which students in this course must knowin order to apply in discussions and both assignments.

Hardy, J, Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015). Section 9.4: Confronting Disagreement. In With good reason: A guide to critical thinking. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/

• Section 9.4: Confronting Disagreement is a section of Chapter 9 ofthe introductory course in logic textbook that is employed in the PHI103Informal Logic course offered at Ashford University. The link for thissource will take you to a PDF format of this chapter. Section 9.4 coversthe philosophical principle of charity, which is a principle thatstudents in this course must employ in their analyses for discussionsand assignments.

Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015). The moral good in three traditional ethical theories [PowerPoint Slides].

• This PowerPoint document covers the main characteristics ofutilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics, and what is the moralgood in each of these.

Articles

Collins, C., & Sokolowski, J. (2015, June 12). Supreme Court sides with EEOC in Abercrombie & Fitch hijab case (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.[Blog post]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.laboremploymentlawblog.com/2015/06/arti…

• This chronicles the Supreme Court’s reversal of judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
  Accessibility Statement does not exist.
  Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. 575 U. S. 1 (2015). Retrieved from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-86_p…

• This is the Supreme Court’s decision on this case, delivered byJustice Scalia, and it includes the only dissenting opinion by JusticeThomas.

Geller, P. (2015, June 2). Why would a devout Muslim want to work at Abercrombie and Fitch? (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.Retrieved fromhttp://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06…

• This article questions the reasons that a Muslim would have to seekemployment at a company that has a look policy that would appear to beunsuitable to Muslim values.
  Accessibility Statement (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
  Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Olson, W. (2015, June 1). EEOC v. Abercrombie: Headscarfs and judicial modesty (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/blog/eeoc-v-abercrombie-headsc…

• This article examines the shortcomings and risks of this Supreme Court decision.
  Accessibility Statement does not exist.
  Privacy Policy does not exist.

Religion in the workplace: Bias unveiled (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. (2015, June 3). The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/…

• This article examines the complicated nature of the ruling, which isin sharp contrast with Justice Scalia’s musings that this case was“really easy.”
  Accessibility Statement does not exist.
  Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Zakrzewski, K. (2005). Theprevalence of “look”ism in hiring decisions: How federal law shoud beamended to prevent appearance discrimination in the workplace (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. U. Pa. Journal of Labor and Employment Law, 7(2),431-461. Retrieved fromhttps://www.law.upenn.edu/journals/jbl/articles/vo…

• This article examines the role of appearance in hiring decisions.

Multimedia

Wall Street Journal. (2015, June 3). Supreme Court rules against Abercrombie & Fitch in head scarf case (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. [Video file]. Retrieved from

• This video covers the 8-1 ruling by The Supreme Court. Transcript
  Accessibility Statement (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
  Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.