Equality of opportunity, appearance discrimination, and reaction qualifications

In Mitja Sardoč (ed.), Handbook of Equality of Opportunity. Springer (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Appearance discrimination may restrict the opportunities of minority groups, including national, religious, and racial minorities. Employers sometimes impose appearance codes on their workforce that disproportionately affect these groups, potentially limiting their access to jobs. It is tempting to think that the solution here is simple. In practice, it might be said, the appearance features that are excluded by these codes often mask the real basis of the discrimination. Seen in their true light, these codes generally involve direct discrimination on the basis of race, religion or nationality. Even when they do not, if they have a worse effect on a disadvantaged group, then they are cases of indirect discrimination. But things are not that simple, for an appearance feature can be a genuine reaction qualification, i.e., it can be a genuine qualification in virtue of the responses of those who come into contact with an employee, such as customers or clients. This chapter addresses the issue of when it is morally permissible for an employer to adopt an appearance code that disadvantages a minority group by pandering to the preferences of their customers or clients in cases where these preferences express their aesthetic tastes or are rooted in reasonable conceptions of the good to which they adhere. Consideration is given to whether the importance of integration might provide a reason to regard appearance codes as morally impermissible when it is harder or more costly for a minority group, such as a national, religious, or racial minority, to conform to them.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,438

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Appearance, Discrimination, and Reaction Qualifications.Andrew Mason - 2016 - Journal of Political Philosophy 25 (1):48-71.
Appearance, Discrimination, and Reaction Qualifications.Andrew Mason - 2016 - Journal of Political Philosophy 24 (4).
What's so Bad about Discrimination?Shlomi Segall - 2012 - Utilitas 24 (1):82-100.
Luck, Opportunity and Disability.Cynthia A. Stark - 2013 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (3):383-402.
Compensatory Discrimination.J. P. Day - 1981 - Philosophy 56 (215):55 - 72.
Compensatory Discrimination.Patrick Day - 1981 - Philosophy 56:55.
Discrimination as an Individual Wrong.Michael P. Foran - 2019 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 39 (4):901-929.
Why equal opportunity is not a valuable goal.Stephen Kershnar - 2004 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):159–172.
Equality: More or Less.Robert E. Tully & Bruce Chilton (eds.) - 2019 - Lanham: Hamilton Books.
Equality, Justice and Legitimacy in Selection.Matthew Clayton - 2012 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (1):8-30.
A note on reaction time as a test of color discrimination.J. David Reed - 1949 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 39 (1):118.
Cosmopolitan Justice and Equalizing Opportunities.Simon Caney - 2001 - Metaphilosophy 32 (1-2):113-134.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-03-04

Downloads
29 (#542,067)

6 months
6 (#510,035)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references