Table of contentsInvestigation into the L'Oréal caseCase solutionReferencesInvestigation into the L'Oréal caseL'Oréal, the small company created in 1909 by Eugène Schueller has become the first cosmetics group in the world . L'Oréal is the largest cosmetics brand and is expected to show steady growth in its business as customers seek higher quality and more inventive cosmetic products. In this case, Elysa Yanowitz was a regional sales manager in San Jose and her performance was above expectations every year. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay During a visit, Yanowitz's general manager, John Wiswall, ordered a saleswoman to be fired because she looked quite bad. Wiswall also advised Yanowitz to find him "someone sexy" who would be suitable for the job. Willwall learned the employee was not fired by Yanowitz. Yanowitz revealed to Wiswall that she would not fire the employee unless he provided sufficient legitimization for the decision. The problem became serious because Wiswall never made the call and Yanowitz never followed through on the request. Richard Roderick, who was Yanowitz and Willwall's immediate supervisor, launched a campaign to fire Yanowitz. They began to collect negative feedback from Yanowitz's subordinate, they criticized her for her dictatorial management style and eventually she was forced to leave her job. The case shows that L'Oréal wrongly countersued Yanowitz for contradicting gender discrimination by his manager. In 1999, Yanowitz filed a lawsuit claiming his manager violated California's Fair Labor Act. Case Analysis The manager ordered a female representative to be fired for failing to adhere to her own established patterns of sexual attractiveness regarding gender discrimination. Yanowitz claims he was ordered by his manager to engage in illegal sex discrimination activities in the workplace. This case has been controversial because Yanowitz denies following the manager's discriminatory order, while many people argue that the employee who does not obey the manager's decision should be punished. California's lower court said there was no violation of fair employment law based on an employee's physical appearance. person in unprotected category. When Yanowitz appeals, the court presents a different view of the case. The court said there had been a violation of fair employment law because L'Oréal managers applied different standards of emergence for men and women. The employer should not hire employees solely on the basis of their physical appearance. Take for example the case of Wilson VS Southwest company in 1981, Southwest's policy was to hire only attractive women for ticket agents and flight attendants. Southwest justified its policy by claiming that the woman had genuine professional qualifications for the job, but this was rejected by the court. Resolution of the case Through this case, we learned that L'Oréal lost its public image when the case was brought to court and in the media. The employer should not make employment decisions based solely on physical appearance. Physical appearance does not reflect employees' job performance. If there is a genuine reason related to physical appearance in the workplace, it should apply equally to women and men. In this case, instead of dismissing the salespeople, the