MPs have demanded an end to “discriminatory dress codes” in the workplace which force female employees to wear heels and makeup.
Two parliamentary committees condemned employers who impose harsh clothing rules on their workers, and said the Government must act more harshly to stop them.
They were spurred to action after a viral petition by Nicola Thorp (pictured above) – a receptionist sent home for refusing to wear heels – was signed by some 150,000 people.
Members of Parliament’s petitions committee and the women and equalities committee issued a reported Wednesday demanding action.
It said that dress codes which force unequal conditions on male and female workers are still widespread, despite being technically illegal.
In response it called on the Government to “substantially increase” penalties for employers breaking the rules, and launch an awareness campaign so employees are encouraged to speak out.
The action was prompted by Nicola Thorp, who was sent home from her job as a receptionist for a London finance company after reporting for work in flat shoes.
She was sent home without pay, and in response began a petition which gained huge media attention and was signed 152,420 times.
The Guardian published an excerpt of the dress code she was expected to adhere to by Portico, the receptionists’ agency employing her.
It demanded workers apply five different types of makeup, stipulated heels “between two and four inches” and included rules for the length of nails and thickness of tights.
In evidence to the committee, the Government said that Portico’s dress code was already illegal – but the committee concluded that more must be done.
The report concluded: “”It is clear that there are not currently enough disincentives to prevent employers breaching the law. […]
“The Government must substantially increase the financial penalties for employers found by employment tribunals to have breached the law.
“Penalties should be set at such a level as to ensure that employees are not deterred from bringing claims, and to deter employers from breaching the legislation.”