Denial of Service by a Government-Funded Agency Over a Dress Code

My question involves civil rights in the State of: Florida

I believe my rights were violated, and I was unfairly and arbitrarily singled out and denied services by a federally and state funded private agency.

I was seeking a service at a state/federally funded employment assistance agency in Florida. I was denied service, and told by an employee and a supervisor that I was in violation of their "dress code".

The issue is, there were several other patrons who were clearly in violation of their stated dress code who were receiving services.

I pointed this out to the employee and the supervisor and was told "that's different"

However, the policy clearly states no person will receive services if they violate the dress code. (I've never before been denied a government service because of a dress code, this is bizarre)

I believe this was an arbitrary, random, and discriminatory action by this agency.

The "dress code" was only applied to me, even after I pointed out specific persons who were clearly in violation.

Furthermore, the supervisor did not even apply the dress code appropriately, and lied to me by stating that it was "different" for the other people there.

I also believe that in general, this "dress code" is likely a severe burden on some people, especially low income people, and should be changed.

I believe this dress code to be inappropriate and possibly a violation of rights to access of services, and perhaps even federal law.

I have other important details about this, but do not want to make the post too long.

Input greatly appreciated.

Thanks

What was the difference between you and the others who were, by your judgment, violating the dress code?

It’s private agency, not a state or federal government agency, per your post. Receiving federal or state funds does not convert a private entity into a government agency. You did not say what kind of services you were seeking, what the dress code provides, what your violation of the dress code was nor what the other people who were violating dress code did. In particular, was their violation the exact same as yours or not?

Note that neither federal law nor the law of any state prohibits discrimination based on how a person is dressed (although DC law does). In order for discrimination based on dress to be prohibited, the clothing worn must have some connection to something that is protected by law. For example, it is illegal for places of public accommodation to discriminate against persons based on religion. Thus, for example, a place of public accommodation that refused to serve anyone wearing a Christian cross, a yarmulke (a head covering worn by some Jewish Men) or a hajib (a head covering worn by some Islamic women) would violate federal law because it has the effect of refusing service based on religion.

Nothing in federal law or the law of any state prohibits discrimination based on income, wealth, or social status either. Without knowing what these services are, there also may be no law that gives you unrestricted access to these services.

Quote:

---

Quoting free9man

---

What was the difference between you and the others who were, by your judgment, violating the dress code?

---

The issue was that I was wearing "shorts". I pointed out a man directly behind me who was also wearing "shorts". I pointed this out to two employees, one a supervisor, and there were other employees witnessing the exchange.

I also pointed to a man who was wearing a white T-shirt, "flip-flops", he was very dirty as well.

Both of these are clear violations of the stated code. Yet, these persons were not asked to leave, nor were they denied services. In fact the person wearing the dirty T-shirt and flip-flops had just finished receiving a document from the person who I initially spoke with and was laughing at my predicament.

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

The issue was that I was wearing "shorts". I pointed out a man directly behind me who was also wearing "shorts". I pointed this out to two employees, one a supervisor, and there were other employees witnessing the exchange.

I also pointed to a man who was wearing a white T-shirt, "flip-flops", he was very dirty as well.

Both of these are clear violations of the stated code. Yet, these persons were not asked to leave, nor were they denied services. In fact the person wearing the dirty T-shirt and flip-flops had just finished receiving a document from the person who I initially spoke with and was laughing at my predicament.

---

So it was not a matter of you being in a protected class and being treated differently based on that? Ok. Well, it's not illegal discrimination then.

Quote:

---

Quoting Taxing Matters

---

It’s private agency, not a state or federal government agency, per your post. Receiving federal or state funds does not convert a private entity into a government agency. You did not say what kind of services you were seeking, what the dress code provides, what your violation of the dress code was nor what the other people who were violating dress code did. In particular, was their violation the exact same as yours or not?

Note that neither federal law nor the law of any state prohibits discrimination based on how a person is dressed (although DC law does). In order for discrimination based on dress to be prohibited, the clothing worn must have some connection to something that is protected by law. For example, it is illegal for places of public accommodation to discriminate against persons based on religion. Thus, for example, a place of public accommodation that refused to serve anyone wearing a Christian cross, a yarmulke (a head covering worn by some Jewish Men) or a hajib (a head covering worn by some Islamic women) would violate federal law because it has the effect of refusing service based on religion.

Nothing in federal law or the law of any state prohibits discrimination based on income, wealth, or social status either. Without knowing what these services are, there also may be no law that gives you unrestricted access to these services.

---

1) I was seeking to be "registered" in their computer system for access to training and employment programs

2) The dress code states no "shorts", and "flip-flops/t-shirts"; there is a list of 18 prohibited items including "untidy appearance".

Who is to judge this "untidy appearance" criteria?

- Actually this code is so ridiculously restrictive, it's almost impossible to adhere to. That's what's most disturbing about this. It's likely that every patron was in violation, and I was singled out. I caused no disturbances, nor was I out of line in any way, or a nuisance. I'm a veteran, I'm disabled and I stated I was a veteran to both the employee and the supervisor.

3) It was the exact same violation as mine. A man sitting in the first row of seats, in plain sight. I pointed out the person to both supervisor and employee.

4) There are no "protected class" issues here as far as I can tell.

I'm having a hard time understanding that a state/federally funded private agency can have an employee deny a basic service to a person for wearing shorts. A clean/pressed pair with a clean shirt; and provide the same service, or just ignore other persons who are in plain violation of the same code for the same thing, even after those persons were pointed out.

I was not there for a job interview, or to meet an employer. I can understand being called out for that. I just wanted to register my name.

Thanks for responding

Quote:

---

Quoting free9man

---

So it was not a matter of you being in a protected class and being treated differently based on that? Ok. Well, it's not illegal discrimination then.

---

This.

Yes I suspected that it may not be "illegal discrimination"

I thought perhaps it was not legal to deny a service to a person, based an an arbitrary, random, unreasonable, unjustifiable, inconsistent application of a "dress code" that's selectively and subjectively applied.

Especially if other violators are standing or sitting right there.

So essentially, I could walk in the place tomorrow with my twin dressed just like me, and the employee could refuse to assist me, tell me to leave, and provide assistance to my twin.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but something just seems wrong about that.

These people are receiving state and federal funds to help people get employment and training.

Hard to swallow.


Thanks for answering

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

The issue was that I was wearing "shorts". I pointed out a man directly behind me who was also wearing "shorts".

---

Why are you using scare quotes? People know what shorts are -- your reference to "shorts" suggests that, in fact, one or both of you may not have been wearing what people here would regard as shorts. Your shorts may have ended well above the knee, or for all we know you could have had them cut so high that your posterior was hanging out. They might have been wearing clam diggers or culottes.

In any event, as should be obvious, you can save yourself the trouble of being denied service for your failure to follow the dress code by following the dress code.

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

In fact the person wearing the dirty T-shirt and flip-flops had just finished receiving a document from the person who I initially spoke with and was laughing at my predicament.

---

Maybe there were other aspects of your appearance or behavior that inspired a more rigid application of the rules.

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

Who is to judge this "untidy appearance" criteria?

---

Employees of the agency.

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

Actually this code is so ridiculously restrictive, it's almost impossible to adhere to.

---

Really? I suspect not.

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

I'm having a hard time understanding that a state/federally funded private agency can have an employee deny a basic service to a person for wearing shorts.

---

You have a hard time understanding why a jobs program wants the people it is helping to dress like they would if they were going to work? To me, it's pretty easy to understand. They don't want to be embarrassed by somebody they place, or to have employers stop working with them because the people the represent refuse to dress appropriately for the job site. Showing up as if you don't care about the rules sends a message, even if you won't be interviewing or reporting to an employer that day.

Quote:

---

Quoting Intrepid

---

I thought perhaps it was not legal to deny a service to a person, based an an arbitrary, random, unreasonable, unjustifiable, inconsistent application of a "dress code" that's selectively and subjectively applied.

---

You can object to whomever will entertain your complaint that their application of the dress code was arbitrary, but in the absence of any unlawful discrimination that's simply part of life. (It's not always fair.)

I appreciate your input. It was very entertaining.