Case Study: Is Hiring on the Basis of Looks Justified or Discriminatory?

Case Study: Is Hiring on the Basis of Looks Justified or Discriminatory?

1. What are the legal and ethical issues in this case?

The issue here is how a company determines who to hire. There is a difference between appearance and personal characteristics such as the color of someone’s skin. If it is obvious that the company is hiring attractive people only, than it would have to be determine if the company is using that as an excuse to hide the fact that they do not hire a certain race.

2. What is your evaluation of the concept of the “A&F look?” Have you personally observed this concept in practice?

Well my evaluation on the A&F look reminded me of many of place but I think the main place is Hooters. They are based on bring guys in the building just by liquor, sports and girls Hooters gets there money by having half naked girls walk around a serving food.

3. Are the employment practices of A&F discriminatory? Are they unfair? What ethical principles or precepts guide your analysis? Since Abercrombie did not admit guilt, does the settlement bring closure to this issue of “looks” discrimination?

I do not think their practices are discriminatory. All companies have a set group(s) they market to. It just so happens that A&F markets to predominately white teens and twenty year olds with a certain look/fashion sense. If I were targeting high school students to buy my product I would hire high school students to market and sell my product, that’s business.

4. What could A&F and other retailers be doing, that they are not doing, and that would make their hiring practices less controversial?

Easy, hire more minorities. If A&F and other like retailers hire more minorities to work in public roles then there would be less controversy. They could also use minorities in marketing, as models and representatives, in an attempt to lure more minorities into their stores to buy merchandise.

5. Where do you draw the...