Well, here's the law. Bona fide occupational qualifications t shall not be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to hire and employ employees, for an employment agency to classify, or refer for employment any individual, for a labor organization to classify its membership or to classify or refer for employment any individual, or for an employer, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining programs to admit or employ any individual in any such program, on the basis of his religion, sex, or national origin in those certain instances where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_occupational_qualifications
You doubt they don't get a lot which may be true, but I bet they get a trickle. In fact they may not be elderly just middle age. I bet they get a lot of housewives or similar. Having walked into their stores I've also noticed everyone is thin. This is in middle America where half the mall is overweight (which none of their clothes would fit). I bet heavier people do apply. But if you walk into an A+F I bet you see a ton of skinny attractive folks. A+F is pretty well known for these hiring practices. They get sued occasionally and settle but they still do it and get away with it for the most part. They might have settled for a plate of chicken wings for a year. You just don't know. Companies DO discriminate in hiring over race, gender, religion or disability. That's the reality.
I doubt in the Hooters case they settled for chicken wings for a year. You wouldn't go through the expense of making a class action suit just for chicken wings. Yes, companies do discriminate even though the law is pretty clear. As we say though in my field a code is only as good as it is enforced. The fact though remains that the USSC including Scalia saw this case pretty clear and the precedent is pretty firmly set that brand image is no defense for discrimination in hiring.
Here we go again. It’s time for Texas to pass even stronger anti-religious law legislation. No mutilation — male or female. If this continues, the Texas governor should instruct courts to ignore higher court rulings. https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/r...cision-jumana-nagarwala-fakhruddin-attar/amp/ Ruling in Michigan genital mutilation case shocks women’s advocates MINNEAPOLIS — Women’s rights advocates said they were shocked when a federal judge in Michigan ruled this week that a law protecting girls from genital mutilation was unconstitutional. They called his decision a serious blow to girls’ rights. Legal experts said the judge made clear that U.S. states have authority to ban the practice, though only about half do. ...
Why? The judge simply said the federal court doesn't have jurisdiction and that it had to be handled by the state. He said the practice was horrible and wished it could be prosecuted in his court. Michigan hadn't made it illegal at the time it happened. This was a conservative ruling based on "strict constitutionalism". You're a fan of this, no?
