Two groups of District of Columbia firefighters have filed suit challenging the department’s no-beard rule. The two suits, filed earlier this week in US District Court for the District of Columbia, allege separate claims that reach the same end: firefighters want the right to have beards.
The first suit, Tysean Belle et al v. District of Columbia, brought by 14 firefighters, alleges race discrimination, disability discrimination, and retaliation. The second suit, Khalid Bullock et al v. District of Columbia, brought by 5 firefighters, alleges race discrimination, religious discrimination, and retaliation.
The suits seek to challenge the city’s Safety Operations Bulletins that prohibits facial hair at the SCBA interface longer than ¼”. The firefighter claims that they were punished for not complying by being assigned to alternative duties, including assignment to EMS.
Quoting from Belle et al:
- If Plaintiffs could not shave to ¼ inch for medical reasons, Defendant placed them on Emergency Medical Services (“EMS”) assignments only, which is an assignment often provided as a punitive measure.
- Defendant has fostered an environment that is replete with conduct and actions demonstrating discriminatory and retaliatory animus where employees, including management, have subjected Plaintiffs to degrading and demeaning comments about their race and need for an accommodation.
- Additionally, Defendant continued to assign firefighters who had facial hair but did not request an accommodation or otherwise engage in protected activity, to firefighting and EMS duties, rather than to daywork or EMS-only duties.
The comparable language from Bullock et al:
- If Plaintiffs could not shave to ¼ inch for religious reasons, Defendant placed them on Emergency Medical Services (“EMS”) assignments only, which is an assignment often provided as a punitive measure.
- Defendant has fostered an environment that is replete with conduct and actions demonstrating discriminatory and retaliatory animus where employees, including management, have subjected Plaintiffs to degrading and demeaning comments about their race, need for an accommodation, and religion.
- Additionally, Defendant continued to assign firefighters who had facial hair but did not request an accommodation for religious reasons and did not engage in protected activity, to firefighting and EMS duties, rather than to daywork or EMS-only duties.
Here are copies of the complaints:
