Marylou’s coffee shops are under scrutiny for allegedly hiring attractive females. I do not believe employers should always be faulted for hiring the more attractive person, all else being equal, and here are two reasons why.
Attractiveness is often related to effectiveness and effectiveness is the top qualification for any job. If job performance is paramount, and the attractiveness of a potential employee helps them get the job done better than an otherwise equally qualified candidate, shouldn’t the attractive person get the job? Why should an employer be forced to hire a likely less effective candidate?

Attractiveness is most often about the fitness and style choices a person makes. If a person chooses to live a fit lifestyle and is self-aware enough to cultivate an attractive personal style, why shouldn’t their positive choices allow them the edge over a slovenly candidate?
Of course the above holds true only when all other factors besides attractiveness are equal and if the less attractive candidate is so through lifestyle and personal style choice. No one should have bone structure or non-self induced physical flaws held against them.

Do you agree that employers should, in many cases, be allowed to hire using attractiveness as a factor?

Comments (2)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s