Airline ordered to pay for women cabin crew's cosmetic costs

Brazilian union official says ruling could influence other professional sectors


Reuters September 10, 2021
PHOTO: REUTERS/FILE

Brazilian airline Gol must cover the cosmetic costs of their female flight attendants and airport staff following a labour court's decision, with a union official saying the ruling could influence other professional sectors.

In the July 29 verdict, reported by local media this week, the court said the firm must "provide, free of charge, to all its female employees, the makeup set provided for in its personal presentation code, as well as pay for cosmetic procedures" including manicures and hair removal.

Gol's women staff, unlike the men, were contractually obliged to devote part of their income to modifying their appearance, southern state Santa Catarina's labour ministry court said.

Read more: New Saudi airline plan takes aim at Emirates, Qatar Airways

In compensation, the airline will have to pay women 220 reais ($42) per month for the expense.

Although the Brazilian labour justice system has issued similar rulings against individual claims, this is believed to be the first class action.

"This decision may influence other professional sectors where women are forced to wear make-up, because if it is upheld by the courts... it will set a precedent", said Clauver Castilho, director of the National Union of Flight Attendants.

He estimated the class action consisted of "some 4,000 women" -- including flight attendants, crew members and airport workers.

Also read: UAE airlines to operate fewer flights to Pakistan until June 15

Gol objected during the trial, stating the cosmetic treatments prescribed were only recommendations.

The court affirmed that the airline was guilty of "gender discrimination and a reduction in women's pay" compared to that of men.

The action includes compensation for collective moral damages of 500,000 reais ($94,700).

Gol told AFP that it "does not comment on legal actions".

An appeal filed by the airline after the ruling was considered "inadmissible.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ