# Waxer fired for refusing to get waxed: reasonable or not? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 3, 2013, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512 "2013-07-03T06:08:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/61 "2013-07-09T18:20:08Z")
If they are employed as airline stewardesses, sure. This woman isn’t. Does a strip club create a hostile work environment\* when it requires its performers to reveal their genitalia under threat of termination? \*AIUI, strippers more frequently work under an independent contractor arrangement, but that’s neither here nor there. ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/62 "2013-07-09T18:52:14Z")
[Deleted because I missed a page of discussion and my comment is no longer timely] ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/63 "2013-07-09T18:58:45Z")
When it comes to reasonable requests, and coercion, you’ll probably find that the law generally recognises the imbalance of power in regards to employment rights and that employees are not always in a position to deny requests, unreasonable or not, due to their need for employment. The employer here is going to need to demonstrate to quite a high standard that there is some overarching reason that this practice constitutes a reasonable part of the employment contract - something along the lines of there being absolutely no other way to gain competence in this activity other than the compulsory exposure of ones genitals to ones colleagues. If it turns out that it is possible to gain competence in this task without self exposure, then there is no reasonable reason to compel an employee to do this, and their right of privacy is highly likely to trump the employers unreasonable request. We are in a field here where not even the police can conduct strip searches without a whole load of conditions and precautions. No matter what you say, this falls pretty squarely into this area. I would be extremely surprised to find this employer can find an employment or public safety reason that can beat the police in such an intimate activity. ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/64 "2013-07-09T19:03:37Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > If they are employed as airline stewardesses, sure. This woman isn’t. Does a strip club create a hostile work environment\* when it requires its performers to reveal their genitalia under threat of termination? > > \*AIUI, strippers more frequently work under an independent contractor arrangement, but that’s neither here nor there. Since disrobing in front of an audience is the _sine qua non_ of being an adult dancer, it would be reasonable to require this of workers explicitly hired as such. This is why it is acceptable for a salon to require their brazilian waxing technicians to perform brazilian waxes on customers even though Wells Fargo is not permitted to require their bank tellers to do the same. Note, however, that even erotic entertainers are protected by laws that prohibit employers from instituting requirements that their workers subject themselves to unwanted physical contact. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/65 "2013-07-09T19:07:34Z")
Sure. But professional sports teams can’t. You don’t think this particular training procedure is necessary, and I agree with you - but it’s not our place to substitute our judgment for that of the employer. **casdave** , I think you’ll find that worker protections are much thinner in the US than the UK. How much thinner depends on the state, but we have nothing that resembles a misconduct requirement for termination, except for unemployment benefits entitlement. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/66 "2013-07-09T19:12:14Z")
Whilst employment protections in the US may be far lower than the UK, I am willing to bet the US personal integrity protections are very much stronger. This is tantamount to requiring someone to allow a personal assault, UK law will be nothing like as strong as the US. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/67 "2013-07-09T19:24:28Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > All states are at will, except Montana, and that has statutory exceptions to a discharge. > > Yeah to most employers morailty and ethics are meaningless, ergo, laws are in place. Too bad you aren’t in a courtroom then. You’re on a message board. We are free to discuss the morality and ethics of laws and the people who obey or don’t obey them. ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/68 "2013-07-09T19:26:01Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Sure. But professional sports teams can’t. You don’t think this particular training procedure is necessary, and I agree with you - but it’s not our place to substitute our judgment for that of the employer. Actually, as citizens of a representative democracy, we are entitled to vote and to lobby on behalf of the institution of worker’s rights laws that we feel will protect our interests. In that sense, it is _absolutely_ our place to impose legal limitations on the actions of private employers, as you will see if the case makes it to court. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/69 "2013-07-09T19:26:03Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Too bad you aren’t in a courtroom then. You’re on a message board. We are free to discuss the morality and ethics of laws and the people who obey or don’t obey them. MANY laws ARE moral based. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/70 "2013-07-09T19:30:13Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Sure. But professional sports teams can’t. You don’t think this particular training procedure is necessary, and I agree with you - but it’s not our place to substitute our judgment for that of the employer. Sure we can, dude. This is an Internet message board. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/71 "2013-07-09T19:31:23Z")
> [@colander](#): > > Actually, as citizens of a representative democracy, we are entitled to vote and to lobby on behalf of the institution of worker’s rights laws that we feel will protect our interests. In that sense, it is _absolutely_ our place to impose legal limitations on the actions of private employers, as you will see if the case makes it to court. You wish. Our government is owned by the One Percent. ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/72 "2013-07-09T19:37:00Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > You wish. Our government is owned by the One Percent. Could you maybe switch sides on this argument? Because you are really not helping. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/73 "2013-07-09T21:36:23Z")
> [@colander](#): > > Could you maybe switch sides on this argument? Because you are really not helping. I kinda have to go with the truth here. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/74 "2013-07-09T22:20:42Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > Geez…I’ve never thought about it before, but just how _do_ most waxers get their training? 🙂 From what I’ve heard, many learn by starting on themselves (obviously easier for stuff like legs) and then practice on friends/willing waxees. ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/75 "2013-07-09T22:30:28Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > I kinda have to go with the truth here. Yes, because as we all know, the ultrawealthy supermen that run this country from the shadows have a vested interest in… ensuring that spa owners get to make their employees wax each other’s buttholes…? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/76 "2013-07-09T22:33:00Z")
> [@colander](#): > > Yes, because as we all know, the ultrawealthy supermen that run this country from the shadows have a vested interest in… ensuring that spa owners get to make their employees wax each other’s buttholes…? I really doubt we have a lot of one percenters that made their fortunes by giving Brazilian bikini waxes, or even owning stores that do. Probably a few. I doubt they have much clout. But an interesting fantasy nonetheless! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/77 "2013-07-09T23:10:00Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Sure we can, dude. This is an Internet message board. I was responding to **colander** , who is making a legal argument, not a moral one. I agree that this is a stupid policy and maybe there ought to be a law prohibiting it. I am merely pointing out that there probably isn’t one. ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/78 "2013-07-09T23:30:04Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I was responding to **colander** , who is making a legal argument, not a moral one. I agree that this is a stupid policy and maybe there ought to be a law prohibiting it. I am merely pointing out that there probably isn’t one. Except that of course there is, because making your employees touch each other’s genitals is a blatant violation Pennsylvania’s anti-harassment statues. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/79 "2013-07-09T23:53:56Z")
How can it be a blatant violation when you can’t explain why? ---
**Author:** ![colander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@colander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colander)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2013, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512/80 "2013-07-10T00:24:55Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > How can it be a blatant violation when you can’t explain why? Perhaps you would enjoy reviewing the statute summary. > [@](#): > > All forms of harassment are unlawful under federal law. Harassment is defined as **unwelcome verbal or physical conduct based on race, sex, color, sexual orientation, religion, age, national origin, retaliation or disability.** Conduct rises to the level of harassment when it’s severe enough to create a hostile work environment or when a supervisor’s conduct establishes a **measurable change in an employee’s status or benefits**. Harassment includes, but is not limited to, sexual harassment. So, once again: women employees are told to wax each others genitals or they will be fired. Men employees, by contrast, are _not_ required to wax each others genitals. This constitutes “unwanted physical conduct based on gender.” Well, what do you know! _That’s harassment!_ Is it a little more clear now? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/waxer-fired-for-refusing-to-get-waxed-reasonable-or-not/662512.md?page=5)