Montreal Restaurant Told Black Hostess She Couldn't Wear Cornrows At Work, Ordered To Pay $15k

Mooney72

Well-Known Member
Quebec Human Rights Commission also found hostess was forbidden from wearing pants, while others could choose
CBC News · Posted: Dec 05, 2018 1:50 PM ET | Last Updated: December 6

Lettia McNickle filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission in 2015. (Sudha Krishnan/CBC)

A Montreal restaurant has been ordered to pay $14,500 in damages to a former hostess who was told she wasn't allowed to wear a popular black hairstyle at work.

In a ruling delivered last week, the Quebec Human Rights Commission said Lettia McNickle was the subject of racial discrimination when her employer — a Madisons New York Grill & Bar in downtown Montreal — sent her home in 2014 for having her hair braided in cornrows.

McNickle made a complaint to the commission in 2015, alleging she was told a month after starting work at the franchise that she was prohibited from wearing the hairstyle.

"[The owner] came to me herself and told me she doesn't like this in, I should take it out," McNickle told CBC News.

The commission's decision found McNickle, who is black, was also forbidden from wearing pants while other hostesses at the restaurant could choose between pants and skirts.

Her mother, Huelette McNickle, who is a hairstylist, had braided her hair.

"What I took 19 years to build up, someone took one moment to crush that," Huelette said.

The Montreal-based Centre for Research Action on Race Relations (CRARR) helped McNickle with her case.

"Her work conditions deteriorated when other staff members who were supportive of her left the restaurant. Her hours were gradually reduced and then her job was terminated in March 2015," CRARR said Wednesday in a statement.


McNickle had braids on one side of her head when, she says, her boss sent her home from work because of the hairstyle. (Submitted by Lettia McNickle)
"Our hairstyle is such a fundamental part of our racial and cultural history and identity, so to deny us the right to freely wear our hair the way we want is to deny our identity as Black women," McNickle said in the CRARR statement.

She said that the ruling was not only a victory for her, but others like her.

"I hope that this decision will benefit Black women everywhere in Canada and beyond, because it sends a powerful message to anyone who thinks of denying our Blackness and our womanhood the respect and recognition we deserve."

According to CRARR, the decision is the first to legally recognize discrimination involving black hairstyles in Quebec.

The commission's ruling is not binding, but if the restaurant decides not to pay, the case can go before a human rights tribunal.
 

VirtuousGal

Well-Known Member
Oh wow...this is the daughter of my sister's close friend, they live in Canada. I remember hearing about this a while ago, good for her!
Quebec Human Rights Commission also found hostess was forbidden from wearing pants, while others could choose
CBC News · Posted: Dec 05, 2018 1:50 PM ET | Last Updated: December 6

Lettia McNickle filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission in 2015. (Sudha Krishnan/CBC)

A Montreal restaurant has been ordered to pay $14,500 in damages to a former hostess who was told she wasn't allowed to wear a popular black hairstyle at work.

In a ruling delivered last week, the Quebec Human Rights Commission said Lettia McNickle was the subject of racial discrimination when her employer — a Madisons New York Grill & Bar in downtown Montreal — sent her home in 2014 for having her hair braided in cornrows.

McNickle made a complaint to the commission in 2015, alleging she was told a month after starting work at the franchise that she was prohibited from wearing the hairstyle.

"[The owner] came to me herself and told me she doesn't like this in, I should take it out," McNickle told CBC News.

The commission's decision found McNickle, who is black, was also forbidden from wearing pants while other hostesses at the restaurant could choose between pants and skirts.

Her mother, Huelette McNickle, who is a hairstylist, had braided her hair.

"What I took 19 years to build up, someone took one moment to crush that," Huelette said.

The Montreal-based Centre for Research Action on Race Relations (CRARR) helped McNickle with her case.

"Her work conditions deteriorated when other staff members who were supportive of her left the restaurant. Her hours were gradually reduced and then her job was terminated in March 2015," CRARR said Wednesday in a statement.


McNickle had braids on one side of her head when, she says, her boss sent her home from work because of the hairstyle. (Submitted by Lettia McNickle)
"Our hairstyle is such a fundamental part of our racial and cultural history and identity, so to deny us the right to freely wear our hair the way we want is to deny our identity as Black women," McNickle said in the CRARR statement.

She said that the ruling was not only a victory for her, but others like her.

"I hope that this decision will benefit Black women everywhere in Canada and beyond, because it sends a powerful message to anyone who thinks of denying our Blackness and our womanhood the respect and recognition we deserve."

According to CRARR, the decision is the first to legally recognize discrimination involving black hairstyles in Quebec.

The commission's ruling is not binding, but if the restaurant decides not to pay, the case can go before a human rights tribunal.
 

Laela

Sidestepping the "lynch mob"
^^^ I'd like to know how they came up with that amount as well.. she initially complained about 4 years ago..inflation accounted for?
 

Farida

Well-Known Member
^^^ I'd like to know how they came up with that amount as well.. she initially complained about 4 years ago..inflation accounted for?
I don’t know about Canadian laws but in the US there are sometimes caps and also you have to prove damages. Additionally, in the states an EEO complaint can take forever and if you found other work in the meantime they compensate you only for the time you were not working for anyone. It is intended to stop people from refusing to look for new work after being fired...and of course companies use it to wait people out, stress them and bankrupt them.
 
Top