• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Employers Be Able to Force Employees to Wear High Heels?

Should Employers Be Able to Force Employees to Wear High Heels?


  • Total voters
    64

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
16,498
Reaction score
8,165
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I was reading The Globe the other day and I came across this article, an Ontario MPP has put forward a bill that would ban:
employers from mandating workers to wear unsafe footwear as part of dress and uniform codes.

Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels. Similar legislation was passed in BC earlier this year. The reasoning is that high heels are unsafe and often lead to foot pain and damage in employees forced to wear them for hours on end. There is also the case of discrimination, men are not forced to wear high heels so why should women?

I have to agree as someone with very flat feet wearing the wrong kind of shoe can cause great pain, especially after standing for hours, I could not imagine doing so in something even worse for your feet like high heels which cause problems even without existing foot problems.
 
Seems like an open and shut case.... Empoloyer makes you wear high heels... Employee sprains ankle.... Employer now owes lady money. Especially if it becomes a chronic injury whether she is faking or not.
 
Depends on the job, and if it was told to you before you took the job. For instance, you apply and accept a job at Hooters, be prepared to wear the 'uniform'
 
Depends on the job, and if it was told to you before you took the job. For instance, you apply and accept a job at Hooters, be prepared to wear the 'uniform'

But this a health and safety issue, high heels are very much a health risk. If just telling the employee about the requirement is sufficient why do we need health and safety regulations at all? Why can't a construction company just say you are expected to do work on a roof without a safety harness?
 
But this a health and safety issue, high heels are very much a health risk. If just telling the employee about the requirement is sufficient why do we need health and safety regulations at all? Why can't a construction company just say you are expected to do work on a roof without a safety harness?


Really?
 
I was reading The Globe the other day and I came across this article, an Ontario MPP has put forward a bill that would ban:


Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels. Similar legislation was passed in BC earlier this year. The reasoning is that high heels are unsafe and often lead to foot pain and damage in employees forced to wear them for hours on end. There is also the case of discrimination, men are not forced to wear high heels so why should women?

I have to agree as someone with very flat feet wearing the wrong kind of shoe can cause great pain, especially after standing for hours, I could not imagine doing so in something even worse for your feet like high heels which cause problems even without existing foot problems.

IMHO only the players for the Maple Leafs should be required to wear high heels.
 

Both cases can potentially end in injury so why not? The point I am making is telling someone about the risk does not negate the risk or the liability. High heels are not required to perform any job, all they do is cause pain for the wearer.
 
But this a health and safety issue, high heels are very much a health risk. If just telling the employee about the requirement is sufficient why do we need health and safety regulations at all? Why can't a construction company just say you are expected to do work on a roof without a safety harness?

Ok, for the most part I agree, but I don't think places like Hooters hire flat chested wallflowers wearing Dr. Scholls. If the standard is existent, then the hiree would be aware and could refuse the job. Plenty of jobs like that.
From the article
The Ontario Human Rights Commission issued a policy paper last year on gender-specific dress codes, saying women who work in restaurants and bars should not be forced to wear high heels, short skirts and low-cut tops.
Middle ground?
 
Both cases can potentially end in injury so why not? The point I am making is telling someone about the risk does not negate the risk or the liability. High heels are not required to perform any job, all they do is cause pain for the wearer.

I don't know, i think fashion models should be exempt from this rule, but the rule should apply generally, for office workers, for example.
 
I was reading The Globe the other day and I came across this article, an Ontario MPP has put forward a bill that would ban:


Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels. Similar legislation was passed in BC earlier this year. The reasoning is that high heels are unsafe and often lead to foot pain and damage in employees forced to wear them for hours on end. There is also the case of discrimination, men are not forced to wear high heels so why should women?

I have to agree as someone with very flat feet wearing the wrong kind of shoe can cause great pain, especially after standing for hours, I could not imagine doing so in something even worse for your feet like high heels which cause problems even without existing foot problems.

I’m not real sure on this one. Seems like it’s part of a uniform. Men’s and women’s dress codes are often different. Women may be required to wear skirts or dresses. And nylon stockings. Men probably not. What if steel toed boots hurt your feet? Should you not have to wear them on a construction site as part of a crew? What if a hard hat gives you a headache? Scratch the hard hat? I’m twixt and tween on this...
 
Ok, for the most part I agree, but I don't think places like Hooters hire flat chested wallflowers wearing Dr. Scholls. If the standard is existent, then the hiree would be aware and could refuse the job. Plenty of jobs like that.
From the article

Middle ground?

That just ignores the health issues of high heels. But I am all for banning gender specific dress codes requiring skirts and low-cut tops, if Hooters want to impose that dress code male staff must wear the same thing.
 
I’m not real sure on this one. Seems like it’s part of a uniform. Men’s and women’s dress codes are often different. Women may be required to wear skirts or dresses. And nylon stockings. Men probably not. What if steel toed boots hurt your feet? Should you not have to wear them on a construction site as part of a crew? What if a hard hat gives you a headache? Scratch the hard hat? I’m twixt and tween on this...

The difference is that those are required to do the job safely, high heels are not required to do any job. Requiring a skirt or dress does not cause health issues because of the garment.
 
I was reading The Globe the other day and I came across this article, an Ontario MPP has put forward a bill that would ban:

Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels. Similar legislation was passed in BC earlier this year. The reasoning is that high heels are unsafe and often lead to foot pain and damage in employees forced to wear them for hours on end. There is also the case of discrimination, men are not forced to wear high heels so why should women?

I have to agree as someone with very flat feet wearing the wrong kind of shoe can cause great pain, especially after standing for hours, I could not imagine doing so in something even worse for your feet like high heels which cause problems even without existing foot problems.

But this a health and safety issue, high heels are very much a health risk. If just telling the employee about the requirement is sufficient why do we need health and safety regulations at all? Why can't a construction company just say you are expected to do work on a roof without a safety harness?

Employers can't force anyone to do anything. They can, however, decide they are no longer interested in purchasing any given person's labor.

Issues like this shouldn't be framed as "should employers be able to force (x)," it should be framed as "should OSHA regulations discourage use of high heel shoes at the workplace?" When you frame it as "should employers be able to force," you're intentionally framing the issue so as to characterize employers as abusive and unjust.

Depends on the job, and if it was told to you before you took the job.

It depends on neither thing. It's either serious enough of a problem to fall under OSHA, or it's not.
 
I was reading The Globe the other day and I came across this article, an Ontario MPP has put forward a bill that would ban:


Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels. Similar legislation was passed in BC earlier this year. The reasoning is that high heels are unsafe and often lead to foot pain and damage in employees forced to wear them for hours on end. There is also the case of discrimination, men are not forced to wear high heels so why should women?

I have to agree as someone with very flat feet wearing the wrong kind of shoe can cause great pain, especially after standing for hours, I could not imagine doing so in something even worse for your feet like high heels which cause problems even without existing foot problems.

Simply depends on the job and that should be disclosed before hiiring.

i mean just pointing out the obvious if the job is some type of modeling then yes or any other job where fashion displayed on your person is a requirement. Its a need pert of the job or at least arguable.

Should all female police officers be forced to wear heels of course not.
 
Depends on the job, and if it was told to you before you took the job. For instance, you apply and accept a job at Hooters, be prepared to wear the 'uniform'

I guess you don't dine at Hooters much, they wear comfy shoes
 
The difference is that those are required to do the job safely, high heels are not required to do any job. Requiring a skirt or dress does not cause health issues because of the garment.

Many jobs come with health risks. A friend's father was a carpet installer. By the time he retired he was literally crippled from spending so much time on his knees.

While high heels may not be required to do a waitressing job it may be part of the marketing image an organization is trying to put forward. As long as the person accepts the uniform up front as part of the job there should be no issue with it.
 
Simply depends on the job and that should be disclosed before hiiring.

i mean just pointing out the obvious if the job is some type of modeling then yes or any other job where fashion displayed on your person is a requirement. Its a need pert of the job or at least arguable.

It's not even up for discussion when requiring heel shoes is reasonable or when it's not, the employer decides these things, not the general public (unless we're talking about public employees). So no it's not at all dependent on the job, nor is advance disclosure required. The issue is should OSHA regulate against the use of heel shoes in the workplace, or is it too unimportant an issue to preoccupy OSHA?
 
I’m not real sure on this one. Seems like it’s part of a uniform. Men’s and women’s dress codes are often different. Women may be required to wear skirts or dresses. And nylon stockings. Men probably not. What if steel toed boots hurt your feet? Should you not have to wear them on a construction site as part of a crew? What if a hard hat gives you a headache? Scratch the hard hat? I’m twixt and tween on this...

Well, steel-toed boots are necessary for safety reasons. Can't say the same about high heels.
 
Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels.

It would have to depend on the job, and why wearing high heels would be a necessity. I can't really think of a situation where a woman would have to wear high heels as a part of her job other than as a part of some type of performance in which the character she's playing would wear them. Maybe a strip joint could require dancers to wear them I suppose. Maybe certain themed restaurants could justify it. I can't imagine there are many others though.
 
Many jobs come with health risks. A friend's father was a carpet installer. By the time he retired he was literally crippled from spending so much time on his knees.

While high heels may not be required to do a waitressing job it may be part of the marketing image an organization is trying to put forward. As long as the person accepts the uniform up front as part of the job there should be no issue with it.

And the ministry would probably recommend that he wear knee pads. You can't justify health and safety violations by just explaining them up front. I can start a company called Harness-less Roofers, doesn't mean I can force them not to wear them because it is part of the brand.
 
Many jobs come with health risks. A friend's father was a carpet installer. By the time he retired he was literally crippled from spending so much time on his knees.

While high heels may not be required to do a waitressing job it may be part of the marketing image an organization is trying to put forward. As long as the person accepts the uniform up front as part of the job there should be no issue with it.

Right. I agree with this.
 
I was reading The Globe the other day and I came across this article, an Ontario MPP has put forward a bill that would ban:


Mainly targeting employers who force women to wear high heels. Similar legislation was passed in BC earlier this year. The reasoning is that high heels are unsafe and often lead to foot pain and damage in employees forced to wear them for hours on end. There is also the case of discrimination, men are not forced to wear high heels so why should women?

I have to agree as someone with very flat feet wearing the wrong kind of shoe can cause great pain, especially after standing for hours, I could not imagine doing so in something even worse for your feet like high heels which cause problems even without existing foot problems.

I'd say it matters on the job and the reason.

For the pretty much any normal office job I'd say no. There's not reason you could prove someone needs to wear high heels to do the job.
 
And the ministry would probably recommend that he wear knee pads. You can't justify health and safety violations by just explaining them up front. I can start a company called Harness-less Roofers, doesn't mean I can force them not to wear them because it is part of the brand.

As far as I know knee pads are part of carpet installer gear - but I'm basing on that on remembering seeing workmen install carpet in my parent's home 40-45 years ago. No amount of support is going to do away with the damage of decades of kneeling.

There is evidence that wearing a belt increases diastolic blood pressure, yet many employers, my own included, demand we wear pants that require belts - instead of say sweats - when going to work. Should employers be mandated to let employees, especially overweight ones, wear sweats? How about employees that sit all day. Sitting is bad for your back. Should employers be forced to buy everyone a standing desk? And so on and so on and so on.

High heels are not unusual. Millions of women wear them daily. Given that you have a very uphill battle claiming that their use should be regulated in the workplace.
 
Back
Top Bottom