Hair Discrimination, The CROWN Act And Why DEI Matters

A Black man in Akron, Ohio, had to start a legal fight to wear his hair naturally at work. 

Seleke Korleh filed a complaint with the Akron Civil Rights Commission (ACRC) in 2023, after VanDevere Chevrolet fired him for what they deemed an “unprofessional” hairstyle, Signal Akron reports. 

In a unanimous decision Wednesday, ACRC sided with Korleh and determined that VanDevere had violated a 2020 CROWN Act amendment passed by the Akron City Council. 

From Signal Akron:

For violating the ordinance, VanDevere Chevrolet must pay Seleke Korleh $850 in back pay for a 10-day period between the termination of his employment and the general manager offering to reinstate his position. The commission also ordered VanDevere to pay him $2,550 for injury, humiliation and embarrassment. The company is also responsible for paying Korleh’s attorney’s fees and must pay a $1,000 penalty to the commission.

Hair discrimination is a macroaggression against Black people. It is pervasive in many spaces, but it is weaponized at work and in schools, and used as a means of preserving white spaces, as the NAACP Legal Defense Fund notes. 

Many Black people are faced with the choice of conforming or being kicked out. This is what happened to Seleke Korleh.

You can’t wear your hair like that at work

When Korleh took a job as a sales consultant with VanDevere Chevrolet in 2022, he was wearing his hair in locs. They were still in the baby loc phase, and he wore a hat over them while he was at work. 

As the locs grew out, he stopped wearing the hats and attached the usual adornments a person with locs may attach to their hair, including beads, cowrie shells, and things of that nature. 

A sales manager told Korleh in July 2003 that his hair was “unprofessional” and advised him to resume wearing hats when he was at work. Korleh appealed the decision to Brian VanDevere, the general manager of the dealership, on July 31. VanDevere told him that his hairstyle violated the company’s personal appearance policy. 

VanDevere then gave Korleh the option to take a job as a lot porter, lube technician, or detailer — all roles that don’t deal with customers face-to-face. 

When Korleh didn’t accept those options, he was fired the next day. 

Someone in legal must have informed VanDevere that he violated Akron’s CROWN Act because ten days later, he left a voicemail for Korleh telling him he didn’t know he violated the law. He offered Korleh his job back and offered to pay him for the ten days he had missed.

Korleh ignored the message and filed his complaint with ACRC on Sept. 7. 

Professionalism as a Racial Construct

According to Signal Akron, the personal appearance policy Korleh was accused of violating reads as follows:

Proper dress and good grooming and hygiene contribute to the morale of all associates and affect the business image we present to our customers and the community. You are expected to maintain a high standard of grooming and to present a professional and businesslike appearance consistent with the duties and responsibilities of your position. Extremes of any style are not permissible. No unnatural hair colors are permitted.

 The phrase “professional and businesslike appearance” is subjective and is usually code for Eurocentric. 

In her essay “Professionalism as a Racial Construct,” attorney and writer Leah Goodridge notes:

While professionalism seemingly applies to everyone, it is used to widely police and regulate people of color in various ways including hair, tone, and food scents.[5]  Thus, it is not merely that there is a double standard in how professionalism applies; it is that the standard itself is based on a set of beliefs grounded in racial subordination and white supremacy.

Understand that when that sales manager approached Seleke Korleh about his hair and told him to wear a hat, it was rooted in racism. 

White people want to feel comfortable, and Black people being their natural, unbothered selves makes white people feel uncomfortable. Their soft space is one in which the policing of Black bodies is necessary. They find solace in Black discomfort — whether they admit it or not. 

The CROWN Act exists because of racism

 As previously reported on NewsOne:

CROWN, which stands for Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair, protects individuals from discrimination over natural and protective hairstyles in the workplace, schools and other institutions. The legislation also ensures that people with unique hairstyles like locs, Bantu Knots or afros, aren’t deprived of educational and employment opportunities. New Jersey Rep. Bonnie Waston Coleman is fighting for the Senate to pass the historic legislation across the United States.

While 27 states have enacted similar versions of the CROWN Act, there is no federal legislation protecting the right to wear your hair naturally at work. 

This legislation is necessary in the first place because for years, Black people — especially Black women — have been forced to alter their hair to conform to Eurocentric standards of what constitutes “professional” hair for work. 

There have been numerous cases of Black children and teens being persecuted at school for their hair. 

The CROWN Act was introduced to keep this from happening. 

Black women and hair discrimination

Hair discrimination is a macroaggression that disproportionately affects Black women in the workplace. 

A 2023 research study showed the following:

• Black women’s hair is 2.5x more likely to be perceived as unprofessional.
• Approximately 2/3 of Black women (66%) change their hair for a job interview. Among them, 41% changed their hair from curly to straight.
• Black women are 54% more likely (or over 1.5x more likely) to feel like they have to wear their hair straight to a job interview to be successful.
• Black women with coily/textured hair are 2x as likely to experience microaggressions in the workplace than Black women with straighter hair.
• Over 20% of Black women 25-34 have been sent home from work because of their hair.
• Nearly half (44%) of Black women under age 34 feel pressured to have a headshot with straight hair.  
• 25% of Black women believe they have been denied a job interview because of their hair, which is even higher for women under 34 (1/3). 

This is white supremacy at work. This is systemic racism at work. This is implicit bias at work. 

This is why things like Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion matter. 

The Trump administration’s war against everything not white

Now that we are in the age of The Elon Musk Proxy Presidency, how long before Elon’s footlicker attempts to dismantle the hard-earned progress we’ve made in this area in the same way he has stripped away DEI initiatives and is working on making Blackness in education illegal?

We have had to fight long and hard for the acknowledgment of our humanity as Black people in this country, and we continue to fight for it every day in ways big and small. 

This new presidential administration has demonstrated in just one month that they are willing to do any and everything to dehumanize us; strip away any type of legislation that levels the playing field for us; and demonize us in the eyes of their followers. 

How long before they come for our hair? 

“A moment in history”

Seleke Korleh told Signal Akron that he just wanted the truth to come out about the way his employer discriminated against him. He said being a Black man in America has a lot of challenges. 

“…[U]timately,” he said, “I feel like it was time for me to stand my ground, and I think this is a moment in history.”

Yes, brother. It is. 

We should be celebrating Korleh’s victory, and we should be celebrating it without the background fear that it will be short-lived.

We should be able to tell this story years from now, but it could be illegal to do so.

Black Hair Matters. DEI Matters.

We matter.

SEE ALSO:

Here Are All Of The States That Have Successfully Passed The CROWN Act

Democrats Make Push For Federal CROWN Act Legislation