I am in a sitution where my wife and had applied to the same chilis restaurant in carlisle pa., and I was hired over her. My wife has way more experience in the restaurant field as to where I have slim to none. We had recieved a phone call from chilis restaurant as is: Hi this message is for James and Gloria. This is Amber from calling from Chilis restaurant here in carlisle. Uh, Dan the General Manager had told me to give you a call to set up a time to talk with him about a job position. If you could give me a call back here at the restaurant. The number here is ***-**** Thank you, Bye When I went in for the interview, the interviewer simply asked me if I could work from 11a-4:30p. I told him no and that I would be able to work 11a-4p. He then told me that I was hired. Thats all there was for me. My wife on the other hand went in for the same thing and they proceeded to use there standard interviewing process. This was the second time being interviewed for her. I was not interviewed twice. She was declined because they said she didnt have what they were looking for. I really need help on this one. We feel a bit of discrimination towards my wife. We could use all the advice we can get. :confused:

Not from what you have posted. Discrimination based on what characteristic? If it is that you two are married, that is not illegal discrimination.

Actually, Im not sure what the grounds would be. I just know something isnt right about what was said and what they did to come up with there decision. Maybe, it was was appearance. I do know that she all the qualifications for that job and I have none of them. Go figure.

I am currently trying to find any and all related cases to anything in this area from Nexis Lexis

Unless it was because of a protected characteristic, such as race, age, gender, ethnic origin, religion, etc., there is no illegal discrimination. Just because she is more qualified than you doesn't mean it's illegal discrimination that you were hired and she wasn't. Unless you can come up with more than what you've posted, I just don't see a case here.

I actually have an orientation tomorrow. My wife is a little on the chunky side and Im gonna see what I have to work with. It could be leaning a little on appearance. But Ill find out tomorrow

It could be. But that's one of the problems with serving customers. There IS an appearance factor and, unfortunately, it is not necessarily illegal to not hire an applicant if they don't have the "look" the company wants. I'm not saying it's fair, and I'm not saying I'd pass the test either (I wouldn't), but it does happen.

It could be. But that's one of the problems with serving customers. There IS an appearance factor and, unfortunately, it is not necessarily illegal to not hire an applicant if they don't have the "look" the company wants. I'm not saying it's fair, and I'm not saying I'd pass the test either (I wouldn't), but it does happen.


I agree, it is sad but true. I was a customer service manager for a company and the head honco didnt like my hair style. Everyday I had people comming up to me to tell me they loved my hair before this situation even happened. I went to school for hair and not to brag but it looked good.
My manager told me that the head guy didnt like my hair and I needed to change it or I could get fired.
I was great at my job and could not believe what I had just herd. I looked in my handbook and all it said for womans hair was it had to be a style that was up to date.
I did a lot of research and yes you can get fired because of apperance, not not hired because of it.
I think it is crap!!!!!! Being based apon your looks instead of skill, what a meesed up world.

Angel, this post is nearly two months old. Unless you are the original poster with an update or have a question about the law being discussed in the thread, reopening a dormant post is discouraged around here.