Running head: HOOTERS RESTAURANTS CASE STUDY 1

Hooters Restaurants case study

Student Name

Institution

Course Name

Date
Running head: HOOTERS RESTAURANTS CASE STUDY 2

Hooters Restaurants case study

Answer 1

Indeed, Law plays an important role of any country and state bodies. Different countries

and states have a different law. In this case we would discuss the federal law and Michigan law

because of both has distinguished and they are affecting Hooters Restaurant two waitresses, such

as Cassandra Smith and Leeanne Convery. Both of waitresses advised that to lose their weight.

(Williams, 2012)

Federal law, those based on Titel VII of the 1964 Civil Right Act said that it is not

unlawful to recruit someone on the basis of sex, religion or national origin. This law that

prohibits workplace harassment and bias and covers all private sector employers, local and state

government. (Miller, & Jentz, 2009) But it doesn’t say about weight while Michigan law cover

weight when it comes to employment decision criteria. Michigan passed the Elliot Larsen Civil

Right Act, those are prohibiting employment bias or discrimination based on religion, marital

status, age, gender, race, height and weight. (Hollander, 2003) Hooters argued that this law

shouldn’t apply restaurant business because his waitresses signs an agreement that they are

entertainer those promote “female sex appeal”. Hooters girls will be followed this kind of

dressed as the company describes that white hooters tank top, orange shorts, brown hooters

pouch, sustan hose, white socks, white shoes, name tag and finally of course… a smile.

However, Hooter Restaurant wanted to solve this case through arbitration. Neither Hooter

Restaurant challenge to the case, nor the judge’s decision. Hooters attorney Rob Huth gave this

advised to Cassie Smith and Leanne Convery.

As per above discussed, concluded that as a judge we would favor Cassandra Smith and

Leeanne Convery because Hooter Company filed the case in Michigan and Michigan passed

Elliot Larsen Civil Right Act those clearly defined that prohibited employee recruitment based
Running head: HOOTERS RESTAURANTS CASE STUDY 3

on religion, marital status, age, gender, race, height and weight. However, Hooter said that

waitresses sign an agreement they are working in a restaurant as entertainers for ‘female sex

appeal” show is legal concern. But company law couldn’t bigger than States or countries law. So

as a judge would support Cassandra Smith and Leeanne Convery as per Michigan law.

Answer 2

Indeed, Hooters Restaurant popularized for spicy chicken wings. Hooters girls would

wear such kind of dressed that white Hooters tank top, orange shorts, brown Hooters pouch,

sustan hose, white socks, white shoes and name tag. Hooters only hires female for “female sex

appeal” those parts of the restaurant business. In this case Cassandra Smith and Leeanne

Convery faced discrimination from Hooters Restaurant when they were promoted. (Williams,

2012)

Hooters treatment of Cassandra Smith and Leeanne Convery to be bias or discrimination.

So Cassandra Smith, twenty one years old, filed sue against the Hooters company in May month

of last year for weight discrimination or bias. Smith received positive performance evaluation

and was promoted shift supervisor. But at the last stage evaluation, the 5’8’’ said she was

advised to lose weight and join a gym. Smith weight was 145 pounds. She hired, when his

weight came down till 132.5 pounds. Hooters gave to 30 days to lose their weight, but her lose

only 10 pounds to get ready for summer body. It was an almost slap in the face because she was

unable to lose less than 132.5 pounds. On the other hand, one month later, another employee

Convery, twenty four year old face same biases or discrimination. Convery, who 4’11’’ and

weight 115 pounds, says she was also terminated because of weight probation and unable to lose

15 pounds. Attorney Richard Bernstein is handing both women’s cases. (Cormier, 2011) Hooter

said, they didn’t discriminate and also didn’t force to employees to work due to her weight. But
Running head: HOOTERS RESTAURANTS CASE STUDY 4

Hooter didn’t promote due to heavy weight. It is known as discriminate because Michigan law

didn’t allow to terminate any employee through weighty reason.

As per above discussed, concluded that if they will sue, then they will get compensated as

per based on Michigan Elliot Larsen Civil Right Act. The Michigan court judge also allows sued

against Hooters for their claim. Our recommendation for Hooter to reduce this kind of issues that

should mention in recruitment bound that if they got heavy weight, then they will not be

promoted in future due to our “female sex appeal” policy, those essential in restaurant business.

So only those people will join their company those are fully aware of promotion policy or

condition of the Company.

Running head: HOOTERS RESTAURANTS CASE STUDY 5

References

Cook, J., (2011). Hooter continues to deny weight bias as case moves to arbitration. Retried

from: http://www.dailytribune.com/20110616/hooters-continues-to-deny-weight-bias-

as-case-moves-to-arbitration

Cormier, S., (2011). Hooter weight-discrimination case moves to arbitration. Retrieved from:

http://www.candgnews.com/news/hooters-weight-discrimination-case-moves-

arbitration

Goldstein, A., M., (2003). Handbook of Psychology, Forensic Psychology.USA: John Wiley &

Sons.

Hollander, E., K., (2003). Employment Evidence. USA: James Publishing Inc.

Miller, R., & Jentz, G., (2009). Cengage Advantage Books: Fundamentals of Business Law:

Excerpted Cases. USA: Cengage Learning.

Williams, C., (2012). Management. USA: Cengage Learning.