Beauty and the Best

We have eliminated many forms of workplace discrimination and made great strides toward erasing others, says attorney Mark Schickman. Nonetheless, one form of discrimination—“Beauty Bias,” as coined by Stanford law professor Deborah Rhode—remains alive, well, and possibly inherent in the human condition.

Today, Schickman shares his thoughts on why this preference for a pretty face could be problematic for employers. Schickman is a partner at Freeland Cooper & Foreman, LLP, in San Francisco and a member of the Employers Counsel Network.

Bias for Attractive Faces Begins at Birth

When babies are shown pictures of adults, they usually reach for the most attractive faces. That bias continues through life.

A 1994 study showed that 9 percent of working men described by observers as “homely” received 9 percent less than average earnings, while 32 percent of the most “handsome” men earned 5 percent above the average.

The most attractive women earned 4 percent more than average, and the least attractive earned 5 percent less than average. A study of law school graduates showed that after 15 years of practice, good looks added more than $10,000 per year in income.

The same pattern holds true for height and weight. The heaviest 10 percent of girls holding their first jobs earned 7.5 percent less than average, while boys gained 2 percent in income for each four-inch difference in height. The New England Journal of Medicine agrees that short men earn $3,000 per year less than colleagues who are a foot taller. 

Training Can Help Mitigate Bias

While these patterns appear to be universal, one can be trained to mitigate them. When managers were shown four photos of women and asked to pick the one “most likely to become a vice president,” the most attractive photo was selected by 73 percent of new managers, 65 percent of those moderately experienced, and 47 percent of highly experienced managers. With training, the bias can be minimized. 

Join guest columnist Mark Schickman for an in-depth webinar all about beauty bias at work—this coming Monday!

Is Appearance Discrimination Illegal?

Is appearance discrimination illegal? It might violate several current laws.

If you favor attractive people out of romantic desire, it could constitute sex discrimination.

If your idea of “attractive” is a Caucasian face, that preference could constitute race or national origin discrimination.

Antipathy toward the obese could violate disability discrimination law, and if youthful appearance attracts you in a job candidate, it could constitute actionable age discrimination.

There Ought To Be a Law?

Now the state of Michigan and six localities (including Santa Cruz and San Francisco) have express laws against appearance discrimination. These ordinances ban employment discrimination based on all ordinary categories and add a prohibition against discrimination based on “height, weight, or physical characteristics.”

Santa Cruz defines “physical appearance” to include any “bodily condition or characteristics  … outside the control of that person, including physical mannerisms.” The good news is that tattoos and piercings apparently aren’t protected by the law.

Rhode says this law will prevent nightclubs from demanding that hostesses wear makeup. It would protect people like the two Atlantic City casino waitresses who agreed in their employment contracts to maintain a height-and-weight-appropriate hourglass figure. It should protect strong fat people seeking work in 24-Hour Fitness locations, eliminating what Rhode calls “the injustices of appearance.

Tomorrow, we’ll look at the flip side of the coin: Is it possible to be too attractive for the job?

Download your free copy of Questions To Ask In An Interview: Interview Questions for Employers today!