Can You Lose a Job For Being Too Attractive?

Posted by Staff Editor in Career Advice • Oct 2, 2013

Yes, you read the title right and yes, it seems that you can lose a job for being too attractive.

There are many labor laws that serve to protect people from unfair or prejudicial hiring practices. For women, there are laws in place that are designed to protect them from being passed over for a job or for being fired due to their gender. There are even federal laws that make sexual harassment in the workplace illegal. For legal purposes, sexual harassment can include “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.” It doesn't cover the occasional offhand comment, the thoughts an employer might be harboring and the jealous imaginings of the boss's spouse.

Recently, a dentist in Iowa fired his long time dental assistant because he claimed that she was too attractive and that in the time that they had been working together, he had grown increasingly more attracted to her. He was worried that he might attempt to start an affair with her, sexually harass her or behave in a way that would be harmful to his marriage.

While I don't think it should matter as far as the legal principles at play, it still seems worth noting that the assistant hadn't done anything to foster these feelings in her boss. At no point has she been accused of being overly flirtatious or behaving in a manner that would make him believe that she would be open to the idea of an affair with her boss. Again, not that it matters.

The dental assistant sued her former employer for wrongful termination and sexual discrimination. During the course of the trial, the legal issue being decided was “whether an employee who has not engaged in flirtatious conduct may be lawfully terminated simply because the boss views the employee as an irresistible attraction.”

The case was heard in the Iowa Supreme Court where an all-male court ruled that yes, an employer can fire an employees, male or female, because they or their spouses view them as a threat to their marriage. The reason given is because the issue in question isn't based on gender, but instead is one of emotions and feeling, which aren't protected.

I'm not sure how I feel about this ruling, but I can see the court's point. On the other hand, I think that it's poorly done of the dentist to fire a long time employee based on his own feelings. When he hired her, I'm sure the fact that she was attractive played a large role in why he felt she was right for the job. For it to be used against her later seems wrong. However, I have to hope that this is an isolated incident and in the end, the dental assistant was better off for not having to continue to work for an employer who was having those types of thoughts about her.

What do you think? Do you think employers should be able to fire people because they're too attractive or because they think that they might be tempted to harass them? Please share your thoughts in the comments.

Image source: MorgueFile

Jeremy E. Laughery • Oct 13, 2013

I almost forgot to ask! Can she sue her parents for losing her job, since the both were half in on this! Just kidding!

Darlynn Fine • Oct 13, 2013

It is always unjust to fire a person through no fault of their own. A manager who has no control over himself certainly has no business controling others. A long time employee has proven their worth through their work and their loyalty. This man showed no loyalty to the employee who now has to start all over again.

Valerie Berry • Oct 13, 2013

I also believe that this atrraction could also be a fatal one so was that consider of the dantal assistants behalf? Also I believe that the employer and his spouse should discuss a trust ???issue themselves.

The case needs to be overturned because the dentist did not afford the woman her due process rights when he began to have feelings for her. She could have been searching for employment elsewhere but was used and thrown away like a pinup doll. Wow! What a douche bag society we live in! I hope the dentist has no more business! Get your teeth pulled by someone else; that dentist is a creep!

James Huggins • Oct 13, 2013

Example:I'm not firing you because you are black, I'm firing you because I've developed a hatred of blacks and I'm afraid that if I let you keep working here I will kill you. So I'm firing you to protect you. Don't you see it is for your own good?Similar? Not? Comments?.

Eunice Atieno • Oct 13, 2013

This is very wrong, he should have talked to her first, let her know that its inappropriate for him to have such feelings towards her; and he should have helped her find another job through his influence.

Philip Hofstee • Oct 13, 2013

Sorry... What ever happened to "at will" employment? He should have terminated her for no reason at all and would have been fine.

HOLLY MURPHY • Oct 13, 2013

I think the ruling is awful! So instead of being a responsible adult the court blamed someone else. So instead of telling an adult male to control himself a woman has to shoulder the responsibility. Yeah I'd say we punished the victim, again!

Randy Howell • Oct 13, 2013

Thats some dumb stuff I ever heard! That dentist is weak an he probably fired her because she wouldn't give he no sex!!!

Frank Cruz • Oct 13, 2013

I think a huge severance package is in order here.

Terri Regotti • Oct 13, 2013

I find it inexcusable that this man had a problem, and his "long time" assistant was punished for his lack of responsibility to seek help. What is to prevent this man from having the same impulses toward other women in the future? Perhaps a female patient? Did his dentistry work suffer due to his thoughts for his assistant who was in front of him everyday?The courts should have assigned this man to get therapy, possibly take medication and/or find a spiritual path to pursue so that he could gain control over his life and sexual thoughts etc This woman should have been awarded damages for having endured an uncomfortable environment; her back pay and future wages that she went without while she was fired and having to fight this case. I hope that this man had to pay all attorney fees and court costs as it was because of his problem all of this occurred. Lastly a dentist can afford this mess an assistant cannot.

Nathan Stover • Oct 13, 2013

The boss is the boss, since he was a dentist , I bet he owned his practice and should be able to hire and fire how he deems fit.

Michael Klein • Oct 13, 2013

That is total BS,the courts should have ruled in her favor so she could have sued him right out of his dentist office.

Donna Lynn Acito • Oct 13, 2013

It's all a bunch of crap anyway. The EEOC is a bunch of lazy, overpaid hivernment workers, that didn't lift a finger to even contact any if my witnesses, but dismissed the case after they messed everything up & lost the documentation. If I haf the money to fight my obviously abusive employer, I would have. The EEOC didn't want to be bothered to have to research anything. They dropped my case in PA, under the guise that there was insufficient evidence. Yet they contacted NONE of my witnesses, ever!

Carlos L. Diaz • Oct 13, 2013

When one works as "work for hire" or "employment at will" either party can terminate that employment status relationship at any time without cause of any kind either through termination or voluntarily leaving your employment.. Therefore there was no issue of improper behavior on either parties parts as there was no explicit or implied specific performance contract that was breached therefore no improper termination. Anybody that works as a normal employee of this sort can be fired for cause or no cause that's waht work for hire is notwithstanding feelings or morality it is what it is.

Linda Littlejohn • Oct 13, 2013

What I know for a fact is that looks always have and always will play a part in employer decisions - and if not there would be no need for federal laws to prevent discrimination in hiring - especially in employer discrimination against minorities. A recent study of the demographics of poverty in Oklahoma - one of the most racist states in the country - found black people were five (5) times more likely than whites to live in poverty in fact 1 out of 3 blacks are in poverty in Oklahoma - and that's real proof of economic damage caused by discrimination in employment. I can personally attest to the fact that although my resume, skills and experience get employers attention and numerous interviews when I show up "black" I do not get hired. I am also well-dressed, educated, qualified and not considered unattractive. Discrimination in employment is alive and well in the U.S. - has damaging and often desparing consequences and will never be eradicated despite federal laws. That people are hired based on looks - but later fired based on performance - speaks for itself.

Adrian Johnson • Oct 13, 2013

I have to agree with the court on this one. The dentist saw a threatening problem arising, his desires for her which could ruin his marriage and practice, so he reacted in the best way. He only had three choices, fire her, leave his practice, or deal with it and get sued and loose his practice and wife later down the line. Hell, that's a no brainer! Now just think if something would have happened btw them and its all over the news and he said that she was to attractive to resist; everyone would be screaming "why didn't you just fire her if your desire was that strong for her?" It is nearly impossible to control love like feelings once they develop. The best thing is to be outta sight outta mind to help control the desires. That's why couples brake up and don't want to see each other until they're over one another. Everyone reading this has been in that situation at one time or another, and the best thing was to get that person outta your face! So in other words, he did the most logical thing, smart man!

Emily Wren • Oct 13, 2013

So the dentist was in effect claiming her attractiveness created a hostile work environment for him? He was also admitting he might sexually harrass her or even molest or rape her because he couldn't control his "feelings" of obsession for her? He also was unable to stay focussed on his patient's teeth while drilling because he was distracted by thoughts of drilling his assistant? And he wanted the world to know that his wife was no longer attractive to him cause he wanted to be with someone else. Gee...I am glad that the assistant is now away from a dangerous man and I hope his wife cleaned him out in the divorce and his female patients, especially the attractive ones, all leave that dangerous dentist. As for the jury of peers...obviously idiots just like him. Yet another case that shows beautiful women DO have it rougher in some ways.

Mark Dickmann • Oct 13, 2013

Dentist handled it poorly. Should have worked out mutually acceptable terms. But I don't see any legal protection for the victim.

Karla wyse • Oct 13, 2013

I have to agree, why was it an all male jury? That's discrimination! Besides when I was a young teen and worked at a donut shop the boss said I was to have sex with him or he would fire me. I told him, "just go ahead and fire me because I'm not doing that!" I left that job right away. But back then their was no laws protecting women. That left me with painful emotions. I cryed after that.

Courtney Wansley • Oct 13, 2013

This is ridiculous, honestly. To have an all male jury is dead wrong for a case like that

Martece McBride • Oct 13, 2013

This is interesting. The fact that she was terminated because of this seems petty and ridiculous. But I do understand the fact that one may feel that way towards another because of the power of attraction. Now this, I presume, is a commission based job and with that I can say that he had that much leverage. The fact the she was his assistant makes it a lot more personal because he has to see her frequently. However, I think he should have taken more time to seek more qualifying candidates for the job. There was no reason why it should've come to this.

Pearlie Ratliff • Oct 13, 2013

This pisses me off, because although it is year 2013, this unjust ruling sends the terrible message that this is still a man's world. No one should be fired because the boss is attracted to him or her. That's the boss's personal problem, and not the employee's fault that he can't control his feeling of lust and be professional and put his own pathetic weaknesses in check and get him some mental help. The ruling is just wrong, wrong, wrong and that's all there is to it!

John Souza • Oct 13, 2013

The employee was an employee at will and thus could be let go for any reason. In this case he elected to state his reason. Despite the perception of unfairness he did the right thing. Perhaps he should not have hired her to begin with. But legally I think he is on solid ground.

B. Wilson • Oct 13, 2013

WOW! So many “haters" writing these comments. First I reply to this quote, "I feel that the jury 'of your peers' was biased because it was all males!! " That is an absurd statement since the jury is picked by the prosecution AND the defense. It was agreed on to have that group as a jury making that statement completely ignorant. From the article, vague as it was, we can assume the dentist was the business owner and there wasn’t an employment contract between the business and employee, the business has the right to terminate employment for any reason what so ever. Do I feel it was a horrible reason to terminate, yes. However, the dentist (which is a very specialized and regulated job) was feeling that he was in an unsafe work environment for him to conduct his job properly. He was putting his personal life at risk as well as his professional life. Have any of you ‘responders’ here ever seen someone you work with totally destroy a business/job due to personal issues? There is way more to this picture that meets the eye. The “Too Pretty” reason for her firing was probably her personal feeling as to why she was fired. She read between the lines as people usually do. The true reason for her release was way deeper than that. I understand her feelings on being fired, but I agree completely with the jury and court. Labor laws don’t say ‘feelings’ are wrong... actions are though. No actions took place against the lady and the dentist has the right to have anybody he wants workings for him or not working for him. Laws are laws... learn them people. We all have to live with them.

Can You Lose a Job For Being Too Attractive?

You Might Also Be Interested In

Jobs to Watch