High heel policy
High heel policy is a regulation or law about the wearing of high heels. These may be required or forbidden in different places and circumstances.
Contents
Regulations preventing the wearing of high heels
In history
In 1430, the height of chopines (which were at times 30 inches high) was limited by Venetian law to three inches, but this regulation was widely ignored.[2] A 17th-century law in Massachusetts announced that women who had lured men into marriage via the use of high heeled shoes would be subjected to the same treatment as witches.[3] In the eighteenth century, high heels and other cosmetic devices were made illegal in England.[4]
Floor surface concerns
The pressure under a stiletto heel is greater than that under the feet of an elephant.[5] Thus, from about the 1950s, as the very narrow stiletto heel became more widespread, the owners of many types of buildings, especially historic and high-traffic public buildings, became concerned about the effects of large numbers of such heels on their floors. Specifically, there was concern that the heels would either damage certain types of floor covering, or cause minor accidents through heels getting jammed in floor-grills, the gaps in planking, or uneven surfaces. Soft outdoor ground also caused problems, affecting both the surface and the wearer. Wood flooring was seen as the most vulnerable, but carpets, linoleum, and mosaic floors were also considered at risk of damage. Signs attempting to ban stiletto heels were often seen, though generally ineffective. A 1963 article in a US building maintenance magazine stated that "Replacement of floors is estimated to have cost at least half a billion dollars throughout the country since the advent of the stiletto heel fashion."[6]
When stiletto heels were first sold in Africa, many of the wearers fell through the floors of their homes, not realizing that the floor timbers had been partly removed by termites.[7] In the US, by 1963 it was being claimed by the Department of Agriculture Forest Service that "with style changes the stiletto-heel problem has diminished".[8]
In American personal injury cases involving slip and fall accidents, the wearing of high heels can represent contributory negligence by the plaintiff.[9] Many high heel policies are related to concerns over the potential for legal claims.
Regulations requiring the wearing of high heels
In media and fashion
The expectation that women should wear high heels in formal social situations has been challenged on occasion. In 2015, a group of women were turned away from a film première at the Cannes Film Festival in France for wearing flat shoes, including a woman physically unable to wear heels due to an operation on one of her feet.[10] The women complained that this was a sexist policy which forced women into a stereotyped appearance; festival organisers later responded that there was no official policy on footwear and stated they would remind red carpet officials of this.[10][11]
In workplaces
Guidelines on acceptable dress codes in the workplace are permitted by law in order to ensure that employees are able to complete their work safely and effectively.[12] However the inclusion of the wearing of high heels in these guidelines has created controversy. Some workplace studies show that women in the hospitality industry who wear high heels have suffered injuries after tripping, falling or slipping.[12] In addition, requirements for appearance which differ for male and female employees have the potential to be considered discriminatory.[12]
During the mid-1990s, several US-based airlines required female flight attendants to wear shoes with heels. Minimum heel heights ranged from one-half inch to the two inches mandated by USAir.[13] Flight attendants at times avoided censure by changing into more comfortable shoes during flights, since their supervisors were less likely to be present there.[14]
In 2009, the UK Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists released a report outlining the dangers of wearing high heels for extended periods and approached unions and employers to collaborate on measures to ensure risk assessments would be completed on women's footwear, and to offer alternatives to high heels where these were deemed unhealthy.[15]
Policies have been challenged in a number of locations. In 2001, cocktail waitresses in Las Vegas organised a "Kiss My Foot" campaign which was successful in getting casinos to relax their requirement to wear high heels.[16] In 2014, waitresses at three restaurant chains in Calgary, Canada, claimed that they were required to wear high heels at work despite complaining of pain and injury. Management responded that there was no written policy on wearing high heels.[17] In 2015, the Israeli airline El Al introduced a requirement that female flight attendants wear high heels until passengers had been seated.[18] The airline's workers' union stated that the requirement would endanger the health and safety of the flight attendants and instructed its members to ignore the rule.
Policies were tested again in the UK in 2016 when a temporary receptionist, Nicola Thorp, was sent home unpaid after she refused to follow the dress code at the office of accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers. Outsourcing firm Portico stated that Thorp "had signed the appearance guidelines" but after Thorp launched an online petition, the firm changed their policy. The new guideline states that all female employees "can wear plain flat shoes or plain court shoes as they prefer."[19] The petition gained widespread support from public figures such as First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and MPs Margot James and Caroline Dinenage[20][21] The petition will now be debated in Parliament, having gained over 130,000 signatures.[22]<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
Make it illegal for a company to require women to wear high heels at work
— Nicola Thorp, Petition at UK Government and Parliament
See also
References
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Modern Sanitation and Building Maintenance, Volume 15, 1963
- ↑ Helmut van Emden, Handbook of Agricultural Entomology, 2013, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 1118469593, 9781118469590, google books
- ↑ United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, research note, Forest Products Laboratory, 1963
- ↑ Gary M. Bakken, H. Harvey Cohen, Jon R. Abele, Slips, Trips, Missteps, and Their Consequences, p. 170, Lawyers & Judges Publishing Company, 2007, ISBN 1933264012, 9781933264011, google books
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
- ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
