Garcia vs. Hooters

1. Was Mr. Garcia a victim of sex discrimination? Explain your answer in some detail based on your understanding of BFOQs.

Mr. Garcia was not the victim of sex discrimination. Hooters Restaurants in this case is covered under bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ) exception. The BFOQ allows the exclusion of one group from an employment opportunity when employer can argue that the “essence of the business” requires the exclusion; meaning when the business would be significantly affected by not employing members of one group exclusively. Hooters Restaurants have a reputation for appealing to male population through large televisions, constantly having sports events on these televisions, happy hour specials constantly, food specials, and especially young attractive women who wear provocative uniforms. The business would not thrive if the company hired male waiters, for the fact that the company was built on the establishment that gorgeous young women are there to take food orders and entertain you. The employment of male waiters in their restaurants would definitely hurt the business. Hooters might not hire male waiters; however, the company does hire males for other occupations within their restaurants chains.

2. Was Ms. Cameron a victim of illegal sex discrimination? Explain your answer.

Just as the previous case with Hooters Restaurants, La Vieille Maison is protected under the BFOQ exception. Ms. Cameron was not a victim of illegal sex discrimination. Although she is an overqualified individual for the position, she is not qualified to work as waiter at this restaurant based on gender. French restaurants are known in society for only possessing male waiters with extensive knowledge of food parings with wine. It is a unique aspect of the French customs; therefore, the restaurant would not be authentically French if it didn’t follow some of the basic French customs. Again, the restaurant might not hire female waitresses; however, it hires females in...