Question

Parliament is telling the nation's employers to stop making women wear high heels as part of corporate dress codes. In March 2017, the lawmaking body promised to ban high-heel requirements, makeup guidelines, and other corporate dress codes that apply to women but not men. Many people applauded the decision. Others said that the dress codes make sure women look professional.

Parliament took up the issue after Nicola Thorp started a petition. Thorp, who lives in London, was working for an employment agency. She had been given an assignment at an accounting company. Her employment agency, Portico, had a dress code. It said that women must wear see-through tights. They must have hair with no visible roots. They need to regularly reapply makeup. Women also had to wear shoes with heels. The heels had to be between 2 and 4 inches (5 and 10 centimeters) high. In December 2015, Thorp was sent home without pay. She had worn flat shoes to work.

That's when Thorp started the petition. The petition said that some dress codes are outdated and sexist. It said that women should be able to wear flat shoes if they are nice enough for the workplace. Thorp believes that dress codes should reflect society.

"Twenty years ago, women weren't allowed to wear trousers in the same role that I'm doing now. And it's only because some women spoke up…that that's changed," Thorp said. Her petition received more than 150,000 signatures.

After the petition caught the public's attention, Parliament set about investigating. British laws forbid companies from discriminating against women. However, a report from Parliament's Women and Equalities Committee found that "discriminatory dress codes" remain common. The codes are discriminatory because they set different standards for men and women.

Lawmaker Helen Jones helped lead the investigation. Jones said that she and her coworkers were shocked by what they found. The committee heard from hundreds of women "who told us about the pain and long-term damage caused by wearing high heels" at work. The committee also heard "from women who had been required to dye their hair blonde, to wear revealing outfits, and to constantly reapply makeup."

Thorp's petition against high heels sparked much debate. On social media, many defended high-heel requirements. Some argued that high heels are simply a part of what is considered professional attire for women. They said heels for women are like jackets and ties for men. Both may be part of a workplace standard. Further, some people took issue with the notion that heels are unfair because they're uncomfortable. Men, they pointed out, often have to wear jackets and ties even when the weather is hot.

Opponents of high-heel requirements say that dress codes for women cannot be equated with those for men. Both genders must wear professional clothing in certain industries. But women's dress codes that require a certain heel height or amount of makeup, they argue, are more about appearance than professionalism. They send the message that appearance is more important than skills.

Opponents also argue that high heels aren't just uncomfortable; they can be a health problem. Health experts advised the Parliamentary committee during its investigation. They said women who wear high heels for long periods have reduced balance and weaker calf muscles. They are also prone to disabling pain.

Nevertheless, Jones said that "women told us that when they raised [health] concerns they were belittled." One was told that "she'd have plenty of time to rest her feet when she was unemployed."

Britain's government said it was listening carefully to such accounts. In March 2017, Parliament official Caroline Dinenage told lawmakers that the UK already had "strong laws to tackle [gender] discrimination at work, and this includes dress codes." But she said the laws needed to be more widely understood and better enforced.

"Shod in heels or flats
Can you make it a summary

Answer 1

The UK Parliament debated workplace dress codes and gender discrimination after a petition by Nicola Thorp. The investigation revealed sexist standards and health risks associated with high heels, prompting tougher enforcement of anti-discrimination laws and better awareness.

The UK Parliament addressed gender discrimination in workplace dress codes after Nicola Thorp launched a petition against being sent home for not wearing heels. This led to an investigation revealing discriminatory requirements such as high heels, makeup, and hair styling that differ for men and women. Health experts during the Parliamentary investigation advised against prolonged wearing of high heels due to the impact on health such as pain and weaker calf muscles.

Despite existing laws against gender discrimination, enforcement and awareness were found lacking. The debate over high heels as professional attire also raised concerns about associating women's professional value predominantly with their appearance, and prompted discussions on the need for more equitable dress codes that consider health and comfort alongside professionalism.