【Loyalty Test (2024) Hindi Web Series】

LONDON -- Forcing women to wear heels,Loyalty Test (2024) Hindi Web Series revealing clothing and makeup in the workplace is evidence that existing equality legislation is not "fully effective", according to a new government report. The government inquiry into workplace dress codes comes after a woman was sent home from her temp job for refusing to wear high heels. Her story prompted over 150,000 people to sign a petition calling for it to be made illegal for a company to require female staff to wear heels at work.

SEE ALSO: Mandatory high heels policy scrapped by firm following petition

"The government has said that the existing law is clear, and that the dress code that prompted this petition is already unlawful," reads the report, authored by the Petitions Committee and the Women and Equalities Committee.

"It is clear that the Equality Act 2010 is not yet fully effective in protecting workers from discrimination," the report continues.Discrimination is still widespreadThe report said that "discriminatory dress codes remain widespread" despite the existence of the Equality Act 2010, which prohibits workplace discrimination.As part of the inquiry, the committees ran a web forum inviting members of the public to submit their experiences of workplace dress codes. In just one week, they received 730 responses, in which women detailed their experiences of imposed dress codes. "We heard from hundreds of women who told us about the pain and long-term damage caused by wearing high heels for long periods in the workplace, as well as from women who had been required to dye their hair blonde, to wear revealing outfits and to constantly reapply make-up," reads the report.

Mashable Trend Report Decode what’s viral, what’s next, and what it all means. Sign up for Mashable’s weekly Trend Report newsletter. By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up!

'Humiliating' and 'demeaning'

Original image has been replaced. Credit: Mashable

Women also told the committees how these dress codes made them feel, which -- according to the report -- painted a "stark" picture. "Workers find dress codes which require them to wear high heels to be “humiliating and degrading”, and “demeaning”. Some commenters felt “sexualised” by their employer’s insistence on high heels," the report said.Next stepsThe report called on the government to conduct a review of this area of the law and to ask Parliament to amend it, if necessary, to make it more effective. The report said that legislation needs to do more to prevent employers breaking the law. The report also asked for detailed guidance and awareness campaigns targeted at employers, workers and students. "The government has said that it expects employers to inform themselves about their legal obligations and comply with the law. This is not enough. We have heard evidence that, in certain sectors, breaches of the law are commonplace," the report continues.

Sam Smethers -- chief executive of women's rights organisation Fawcett Society -- said that the dress codes have no place in workplaces in 2017. "Sexist dress codes which objectify women and make LGBT+ employees feel excluded have no place in modern workplaces," said Smethers. "Employers need to focus on what drives productivity and enables their staff to feel part of a team. It isn't a pair of high heels," Smethers continued.

---

Featured Video For You

---

Of course Emma Watson is hiding feminist books all over the London tube

---

Topics Government

• Life
• Entertainment
• Games
• Tech
• Shopping
• Social Good
• Digital Culture
• Science

• NYT Strands hints, answers for April 14
• Wordle today: The answer and hints for January 6
• 'Foe' review: Saoirse Ronan and Paul Mescal can't save this empty sci
• CES 2024: How to watch keynote livestreams for Sony, Samsung, and more
• Today's Hurdle hints and answers for May 5, 2025
• CES 2024: Dates, ticket prices, exhibitors, and everything else you must know
• Internet conspiracy theorists are convinced aliens appeared at a mall in Miami
• Staff Picks: Monsters, Monuments, and Miranda July by The Paris Review
• NYT Strands hints, answers for April 14
• Letterboxd announces TV series reviews coming in 2024; apparently regrets saying so

• Facebook needs to hire a public editor
• Google Doodle pays tribute to Japanese geochemist Katsuko Saruhashi
• 'Delete Facebook' searches hit 5
• Apple to launch a cheap new iPad next week, report says
• David Mitchell teases details about his next novel
• Snap Map Explore adds text statuses automatically for Snapchat users
• Find out which Easter candy is the most popular — or polarizing — in your state
• Perfect pranks for celebrating Easter since it's on April Fools' Day
• 'Deadpool 2' trailer has the seeds of a franchise
• AeroMobil's latest electric flying car concept hopes to take off in 10 years

• Skywatching is lit in May, says NASA
• Male Interiority: An Interview with Emma Cline by Annabel Graham
• The Nature of Gary Snyder by Robert Hass
• The Art of Distance No. 25 by The Paris Review
• Skywatching is lit in May, says NASA
• Staff Picks: Blood, Bach, and Babel by The Paris Review
• The Origins of Sprawl by Jason Diamond
• Redux: A Ball of Waxy Light by The Paris Review
• 'Thunderbolts*' mid
• Hong Kong Pizza Hut offers free pineapple after Italy objects to Olympic win

• Best earbuds deal: Save 20% on Soundcore Sport X20 by Anker
• Redux: A Ball of Waxy Light by The Paris Review
• Parker Posey, Jason Isaacs, and more check into 'The White Lotus' Season 3
• Painting with a Moth’s Wing by The Paris Review
• Waitin’ on the Student Debt Jubilee
• Staff Picks: Monsters, Monuments, and Miranda July by The Paris Review
• 'Night Swim' review: More like Amityville bore
• Wordle today: The answer and hints for January 6
• Keeping Hope Alive
• Dear Building Residents by Lee Conell