We might be tempted to think, in this day and age, that a move as stupid as this one could not happen in our enlightened business world. However, the CEO of American Apparel (AMEX: APP), seems to think otherwise.According to a story provided by Gawker.com; "American Apparel's ... madman CEO, Dov Charney is demanding the firing of employees he deems unattractive and thus detrimental to the "AA aesthetic."
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that people (especially in America) are ultra sensitive to negative comments about appearance. It also does not take a great deal of intelligence to recognize that the firing of employees based on their looks is a stupidly discriminatory practice. So, being that this project is being undertaken at the sole direction of CEO Charney, one does not have to spend much time analyzing exactly who is the stupid one over there.
The story from Gawker implies that American Apparel's store managers are being forced through intimidation to fire plain looking employees for the slightest mistakes. The supposition is that CEO Charney is simply weeding out his less than glamorous employees.
One could easily suppose that if CEO Charney does not reverse his course, relent on his aesthetic witch hunt, and reinstate employees who may have been fired for questionable reasons, things could get very ugly for American Apparel in one big hurry.
What Happened When Alex Kenjeev Paid His Student Loan in Cash
Facebook's IPO Debacle, Day 3: Un-Friended and Dis-Liked on Wall…


Reader Comments (Page 5 of 5)
7-29-2009 @ 2:01AM
Harry Nieves said...
Dov Charney looks like the high school nerd who never got a date. Most guys mature from this stage, have succesfull careers and develop gracious personalties. Dov seems stuck in the past both socially and physically. He needs a physical and mental "makeover." If he looked in the mirror he would fire himself.
7-30-2009 @ 11:13PM
yeamaddie said...
I don't have a problem with this. We live in a material world and if you are a tubbo don't apply where you will be judged.
7-29-2009 @ 3:01AM
godessathenanike said...
I work for a police department and I had to bleach my hair blonde and dress like a hooker to keep my job, after I kept over-hearing comments like: "Our new secretary is not a looker." I don't hear those "ugly" comments now. I gave them what they deserve.
As for this CEO moving out of Mexico...he probably thought Mexicans are uglier than Americans.
7-29-2009 @ 3:03AM
lisa said...
i have never seen such ugly boring stupid unimaginative clothes as american apparel also the quality of the fabric is plain awful who would want this crap? the cotton is so thin and flimsy and cheap...made in america or not the stuff is garbage just like H & M dont know which is worse...
7-29-2009 @ 3:35AM
la liberte said...
so what's the difference between this and Hooters? or the Playboy Mansion? Or any other business that is based on looks?
It should be up to the business to hire whomever they want, and if customers are offended, the company will lose money and have to change.
7-31-2009 @ 9:37PM
evelyn said...
This is disgusting! And hygiene is not the same as attractiveness. When businesses begin to have policies to hire only attractive people, you are going to see vapid, vain, self-absorbed people doing us a favor to serve the customer and hard-working folks who need a job and are reliable employees, sitting at home on unemployment. This whole thing just stinks.
7-29-2009 @ 4:12AM
Dudley Haas (Wacko, Taxes) said...
I fired a lady who worked for me cause she was overweight. She ended up starving to death and didn't have to be burried in a piano case after all. I saved her family a lot of money and embarrassment.
7-29-2009 @ 4:32AM
Mike said...
Only beautiful people like us shop there anyways. We know when the repulsives arrive to browse.
7-29-2009 @ 4:29AM
nancy said...
This comes as no surprise to me. I've been looking for a bartending job and now they are asking for head shots!!! You have to be a model to pour whiskey in a glass now.
7-29-2009 @ 5:23AM
Shellfish789 said...
What is ugly?...
What is ugly to one person is not ugly to another....!
7-29-2009 @ 5:42AM
vickyabeals said...
I so often hear the word 'discriminatory' used in comments with reference to bad practices. Remember, it has to be 'unfair' discrimination. To discriminate can mean you elect to purchase a home that passes certain criteria, such as soundness, well maintained or updated, in a neighborhood with parks or trees...this is an example of using discrimination. The question is whether or not the discrimination is unfair. That being said, whether or not the mentioned employer is using unfair employment practices, or unfair discrimination, would require more inquiry on my part. I'm simply addressing the way the majority of posters use the word 'discrimination'.
7-29-2009 @ 6:27AM
jjoekiker7 said...
1st... Why do readers believe every dang thing they read...I mean look at the source, that same Gawker Mag has seen 3 headed babies in government secret caves... So fellow readers..........get a BRAIN....... 2nd...Its his company, he can or dang well SHOULD be able to fire anybody, anytime, for whatever reason he deems relevant or not freakin relevent......Is this a communist country, keep the gov. and their laws outa this, if I owned my own company selling bathing suits, would I want a bunch of fat old farts running rooling and lookin for the snack room. Sure I would, yeah I would fire all the good looking, beautiful body, woman, I mean come on, who wants attractive people workin for them, just the fat ugly toothless and really stupid need apply, thank-you very much.
7-29-2009 @ 6:55AM
Pathos said...
Judging people based on something as superfluous & temporary as their looks is as disgusting as judging someone on race. Ridiculous, shallow people. Which one of us is guaranteed ANYTHING we have tomorrow? One accident or illness can change YOUR looks. Finally, EVERYONE gets older & the bloom of youth is fleeting at best. The late great Zappa said it best when he wrote, "What's the ugliest thing on your body? Some say it's your toes, some say it's your nose. I think it's your mind."
7-29-2009 @ 7:26AM
Bothepro24 said...
It doesn't matter what you look like. I like everyone and at my store http://threedogs.gigabitprint.com/ everyone is welcome. Create your own text message for placement on any of the wide variety of products offered. I am not American Apparel, I am an out of work PGA Professional living in Florida trying to make ends meet. Please just visit the store and let me know your thoughts. I have reduced prices 15% for August back to school purchases. Email Bothepro24@aol.com and give me your feedback. I can also create links for parents involved in Booster Clubs trying to raise money for special events. One popular item has been our 40"X60" blanket that people download a photo of their High School Team that is laser etched and the picture comes out with great clarity (provided the picture you use from your computer is clear) and with outstanding color.
7-29-2009 @ 8:32AM
Barbara said...
If this is true, he's missing a great opportunity. Even "ugly" people can look great in the right outfit. Look at Mick Jagger. That is one homely dude, but he can sure look cool. There are lots of ugly famous people who are fashion forward. Count them.
7-29-2009 @ 11:44AM
Gordon said...
I agree that speaking about a person's appearance as the American Apparel has apparently done is highly sensitive. However, despite the discomfort that it causes, much objective research data reveal and document that employees of higher physical attractiveness may in fact be more productive for numerous reasons than their less physically attractive counterparts.
I say this with discomfort on my own part because as I often say, "Beauty is Ugly" or, at the least, "Beauty can be Ugly." There are some larger societal considerations here. But, it is legal IF the physical attractiveness action does not equate with such legally prohibited discriminations as those based on age, race, ethnicity, physical disability, and so forth.
Dr. Gordon Patzer
author of "Looks: Why They Matter More Than You Ever Imagined"
http://www.GordonPatzer.com
7-29-2009 @ 3:35PM
bettyrocket said...
I personally know someone who works for the company and know for a fact that at her store they require applicants to submit a photo of themselves that is sent to home office for "approval" before they are considered. They are specifically told to only hire attractive applicants.
7-30-2009 @ 11:13PM
jerry said...
It is the same thing as when companies fire Those they feel can't sue them for minor infractions(those that are not protected)While fearing to fire those that might be a worse employee because they are AFRAID of being accused of racism. This happens all the time. Why doesn't the MEDIA commet on this discriminatory Common event?
IT blatently happens during layoffs. The guy considered the Majority(white guys) will be laid off far faster then the groups that are protected more by the EEOC(they don't give a damn). This is discriminaton and racism but I guess if it doesn't happen to minority NO ONE cares. I thought people were supposed to care about everyone equally??? YES I KNOW THE HOLIER THEN THOU LIBERALS WILL ATTACK AND SAY - RACIST!!! EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NOTHING RACIST SAID AT ALL UNLIKE YOU GUYS I THINK IT IS WRONG WHEN ANYONE IS MISTREATED OR TREATED UNFAIRLY WHERE I WORK THE FIRST TO GO IS WHITE GUYS AND HISPANICS IT IS WRONG AND IT IS THE LOWER MANAGEMENT THAT DOES IT BECAUSE THEY ADMIT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY ANYTHING TO CERTAIN PEOPLE AS THEY SAY. THE UPER MANAGEMENT JUST LOOKS THE OTHER WAY ----ALL BECAUSE OF LAWSUITS AND THE FEAR OF SOMEONE PROTECTED BY THE MEDIA AND EEOC WILL FILE A LAWSUIT. LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO THE FIREFIGHTERS AS A CLEAR EXAMPLE WHAT GOES ON EVERYDAY IN AMERICA... IT IS WRONG NO MATTER WHAT COLOR SOMEONE IS. I WOULD THINK YOU LIBERALS WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT?(THAT IS IF YOU WERE REALLY AS PROGRESSIVE AS YOU CLAIM-WHICH I KNOW IS NOT TRUE AT ALL)
8-03-2009 @ 9:46PM
lolnoban said...
I don't know how much I believe this.
But in the event that what's being said is true, I think it's a silly reason to fire people. I doubt customers give a shit about how ugly the employees are; I'm sure that they're more concerned about how their pencil dress will look when they wear it clubbing later that night.
If Charney believes in all of this heart that the "ugly people" working in his stores will lead to a downfall, he should at least investigate it. Perhaps he could develop a countrywide point system to see how many sales individual employees make.
But anyway, I think that a person's capability of being an employee, even at American Apparel should come down to how they present themselves, their outlook on being an employee, and how industrious and helpful they are.
I'd rather have a chick with a unibrow and a good heart assist me rather than some gorgeous babe with a façade of a person that adores how a bodysuit looks on me, only to feel entitled talk smack about my "thunder thighs" because she works there.